Hearthpwn

I have to admit that I haven't played much since quest rogue was unnerfed and I can see how the meta shifts towards hyperaggro, but the pre-patch meta was dominated by Secret Mage, Kingsbane Rogue, Darkglare Lock and Raza Priest, and since secret mage is NOT an aggro deck but a midrange/tempo deck, only Darkglare and Kingsbane are truly aggro. Discard zoolock has been a joke in this meta (I played every single tier 1 and 2 list except Darkglare and I have a 100% winrate with every deck against it). It's ridiculously overrated. Token druid was decent, but not even near tier 1 anymore after Reader nerf.

You can nitpick about names all you want but secret mage is a deck that tries to end the game as soon as possible, it is not purely a face deck and I will agree with you on that as it needs to fight for the board but it's still VERY earlygame focused, it tends to last longer then most of its peers thanks to steady draw but still....you said it yorself "midrange always loses in eternal formats because you can't make it fast enough to consistenly beat aggro without becoming aggro".
discolock is not as strong as the tier 1 decks but you can't call that a complete joke. Token druid is the only one I wasn't too sure about.

I have read the Hearthstone wiki article and it seems to me that someone completely misunderstood this rock-paper-scissors thing. You can check every resource for every other card game on the planet and they all say exactly the opposite: aggro bad vs. midrange because the board gets stabilized too soon, good against control. Control doesn't mean heal/armor, it means controlling the board and nothing else. Classic control is weak against aggro because of burst and chip damage.

you still refuse to admit that any decent control deck NEEDS to run some form of healing AS WELL AS ways to control the board since if you don't, you just get run over by burn. Some may be more or less "biased" towards early survival but those that are (which is most of the control decks in HS) DO have a slightly favored matchup vs aggro, while they lose to (guess what) things like the old dethrattle hunter....a midrange deck...a deck that wins via steady threats that are hard to remove but lacks ways to deal with early aggression very well. Control decks come in many forms but they all have a focus on one thing: survival.... after that it may vary, it could be strong burst dmg, or big boards, or (if you're me) power through the opponent's bs.

Pure control decks don't exist in wild because a) they are bad against aggro, b) there is no midrange to dominate, c) OTK combo decks are very favored against them unless there is a very specific counterplay.

The third one is the only correct one (although more than "favored" I'd say toxic RNG fiesta of "did they draw rat b4 the combo? Did rat work?")

Tickatus has absolutely nothing to do with that. If anything, Tickatus counters OTK/combo decks and it's mana investment is usually so high that it's too slow even in these matchups (standard spell damage OTK lists already kill you by turn 7). Control decks care 0% for Tickatus unless there is a really important card that wins the MU by itself like the Boom DK.

This is so unbearably false it's insane: yes most OTK decks ARE faster BUT a control deck needs, in order to deal with renolock (which is the only deck running [REDACTEDTUS]) ALL of its boardclears, value generators and threats...I fatigued MANY reno/cube locks b4 [REDACTEDTUS] because I was able to match all of their threats with my removal/value, if you take away 5/10 cards from my deck I am left with "SMORC and burn" as the only options...which VERY few lategame decks can do

I have lost more matches with raza priest against warlock due to Gnomeferatu than Tickatus tbh. It is also worth noting that milling your Spawn is still not the end of the world. You literally need two cards for your combo and if you get Spawn milled, there is still the option to buff your damage output by copying your Pen Flinger or maximising your cost reductions. Tickatus is unlikely to hit your win condition.

I have met a [REDACTEDTUS] player that claimed the opposite so, since I don't play these decks, I won't agree or disagree with you.

sorry but I see no differnce between the meta you discibed and what it's been since AT LEAST darkmoon. The only difference is that there may be different decks now with the unnerfs

Reading this feels as if we play two completely different modes when we play wild.

Starting with the "all the best decks are ultra-aggressive" part and ending with your potential solution. And it's not control decks who stop aggro, it's midrange that stops aggro by going slightly bigger and outvaluing/taunting up and applying counter-pressure.

The best wild decks as of right now are darkglare warlock, kingsbane/odd rogue (though idk if the nerf affected this), zoolock is really good, secret mage infests the pre legend ladder and then you have aggro druids (these should be all of the "top tiers" unless I'm forgetting something). The slowest one of these decks is darkglare warlock and I don't really think it can be classified as anything but aggro/tempo.
Yes big priest is also strong but I don't think it's currently popular or strong enough to challenge these decks' wr as it should lose to them given they kill you before turn 5/6 when he can actually play Shadow Essence (don't quote me on this one...not playing either style means this is only "in theory" for me).

Also midrange decks are in general, by nature, weak to aggro decks but since I am unlikely to convince you by myself here is a quote from hearthstone wiki (yes, obviously I KNOW that it's not 100% reliable...still if nobody ever bothered to correct it, it must mean something):

The speed of aggro decks allows them to defeat slower-moving midrange decks before they are able to stabilize, but their focus on aggression over longevity leaves them vulnerable to control decks' stalling, heals/armor, taunts and more efficient trades. Control decks are in turn often too slow to defeat midrange decks and their tempo swings to which they are vulnerable.

While these trends are consistently observed, note that they represent only an increased likelihood of victory, and there are exceptions as well. In addition, different decks have very specific strengths and weaknesses against each other, making knowledge of the specific decks involved important in estimating the likely outcome of a match. However, this pattern is widely held to depict overall trends for the main deck types.

so as you can see I'm not the only one presenting this argument...but let's move on. 

But midrange always loses in eternal formats because you can't make it fast enough to consistenly beat aggro without becoming aggro and you can't make it control-heavy enough without becoming actual control.

THIS I can actually agreee with

Control decks are only good against aggro if they can relaibly clear and heal up like priest or reno decks. Try any non-reno control list in a class with no heal/armor and you will see what I mean.

I mean...by definition a control deck NEEDS to have healing/taunts/armor (good survivability in general) and if they don't....well that is either not a control deck...or quite the trash one. You could argue that rn the only decks that CAN survive aggression like that are reno decks in specific classes but that is more relative to the powerlevel of the aggressors.

Also, how can anyone seriously think that Tickatus or Envoy are problem cards in wild? Lol, you're dead or won 3 turns before Tickatus even becomes active. Like seriously, even my raza priest doesn't care for your freaking Tickatus and that's really the only deck it could counter.

If you read my post a bit more closely you'd realize that I specifically said these cards are bad vs aggro decks (aka the strongest/most prevalent decks in the format)...they are not overpowered...FAR from it...the problem is that their existance in their current form (together with many other bs OTK/mill) makes sure NO reactive deck will ever see the light of day in wild to try to challenge the aggressive deck's reign...unless they accept that the warlock/priest matchup is a loss basically every time which I would dare describe as not fun. Why did I choose them and razanduin as an example? Because they are OTK/mill decks with a controlly shell that allows them to have a slightly better wr vs aggro then the pure OTK/mill ones while still retaining the "oh you play a low pressure deck? thx for the free stars lol". Razanduin is the exact same in terms of how much it invalidates reactive decks and honestly I have a VERY hard time believing that you don't care about REDACTEDTUS being played...they have more or less as much draw as you do so they are very likely to snipe at least 1 of your combo pieces with either him or the other 87 disruption cards they run.

The only thing I can agree with is the "reloading 50 times in a row is bs and unfun" part. Vargoth is a problem.

I mean...is Archmage Vargoth REALLY a problem? he's strong for sure but he's only really problematic because of his synergy with big priest cards (yes and quest mage too....luckily that deck is not very popular rn).Outside of that I can't think of a deck (that can run him) where he isn't just a fun and strong card.

As a wild player (ever since Frost Lich Jaina rotated out, I am still "salty" about that) I believe wild is a few buffs and nerfs away from actually becoming fun, but let's elaborate a little:

• All the strongest decks are aggressive....ULTRA aggressive to be exact and I do believe that's perfectly fine given the nature of HS, what isn't fine however is that their INSANE abilty to reload legit invalidates many decks (and honestly, while it's funny to see it happen once it's not that funny the 8th time you see kingsbane rogue or zoolock have no cards left in deck by turn 7) so a little "touch" to their card draw should be enough to bring all of them down from bullshitland and actually make them slightly more fair...enough for wild at least

• what can stop aggressive decks? Usually control decks. Are there viable control decks in wild? NO, not a single one, the "closest" ones are: 1)renolock, which is it not as good vs aggressive decks since it is either a mill/disruption deck with REDACTEDTUS and similar BS or a near infinite one with lol I get 3 primes and delay fatigue (or both, rare but it happens). 2) raza priest, which is a bit stronger vs aggressive decks as it's an OTK that runs a (more draw focused) controlly shell to survive...ALSO it gets destroyed by REDACTEDTUS. Coincidentally these 2 decks (together with the 145 other OTK/mill/inifinite decks in the format, these 2 are the biggest offenders as they are the strongest ones) ALSO make sure NO actual control deck ever rises in the format to challenge the previously discussed aggressive decks. So 1 mana raza hero power and REDACTEDTUS always discarding from your deck as well should be enough to bring them down to a point of "I can realistically react to them" ...therefore letting actual reactive decks exist to challenge (to an extent) the extreme aggro decks.

• big priest and reno/cube lock are still here inavalidating many midrange/value decks that could diversify the meta and make sure no reactive deck is allowed to rule the format ala rise of shadows Archivist Elysiana warrior mirrors . So a buff to transform effects OR a "delay" on when these boys can cheat stuff out should bring their power down enough so that they don't invalidate 3/4 of the possible decks you can make.

Well, you mentioned that you only automatically won vs combo decks and that's true as they need a VERY specific set of cards that they can't win against any deck without BUT as I discussed earlier, if you want to only look at it without context then sure, he didn't directly win you the game vs reactive decks...if you add context however (to quote my earlier post) "in order to win a value war vs them you need to match them card for card, you need ALL of your removals, ALL of your threats, ALL of your value generators AND (sometimes, happens more often than you think) you ALSO need a fatigue advantage (or at least not disadvantage) to outlast them after you (fking somehow) managed to resist all of its boards"  so it's not exactly the fact that you don't have your cards that's killing you...it's the fact that this guy randomly takes away the resources you need in order to fight a value war vs (in this case) renolock, letting the rest of the deck kill you almost uncontested...I fatigued MANY renolocks/cubelocks to death before this card came out but they ALL were close games where I had to dig SUPER deep in order to finally win, as you can imagine if you take away 5/10 cards these close matches that went down to the very last card become...not too close anymore, therefore invalidating a playstyle vs them...therefore being a mistake as you kill diversity.

The "control" decks you mentioned that were able to beat you were (quite ironically) actually infinite decks (or VERY close to it) now obviously decks like that RARELY care about having 5/10 cards burned away as they'll never run out of stuff anyway (unless you get ultralucky)...or even fatigue for that matter (I could go onto why these decks are also quite horrible but that would fall into opinion and we are now past that in this discussion I feel...even though I can't see how anyone can enjoy a HS game where the decks literally cannot end)

You are saying you annihalate raza priest (which is a combo/OTK deck that can afford to run a more draw focused controlly shell since the combo requires no setup...exactly like [REDACTEDTUS]) and I believe you 100% as it's just another combo deck for you to disrupt.

On second part however I have stuff to say: "we should ponder at this point, if an achrtype that potentially loses its wincondition, via discard, is a good deck after all" well in another card game...debatably...you may be correct however this point is a bit more risky to make when addressing HS:
First of all, there are WAY less cards in deck than any other game (at least that I know of) so each card you lost hurts A LOT more, secondly there are NO ways to prevent/counter said discards, then you get into the fact that said disruption in HS is always pure RNG directly deciding the outcome of a game (unlike e.g. discover where you get to choose what to play and when to play it making player choices actually matter...indicating good design) so I'd say that disruption/discard/mill is the mechanic that's out of place here.

Given these assumptions you may still argue that a deck should be able to generate more winconditions one way or the other...still this limits the amount of decks that can even come close to compete in the lategame SIGNIFICANTLY as VERY FEW cards allow a gamplay style like that to exist in this game...do you want to know why they don't print more? Remember the double Archivist Elysiana warrior mirrors in rise of shadows? These toxic and neverending shitfests of boredom? Yea THAT's where most control mirrors would devolve into as all control decks now would need to run ways in which fatigue doesn't kill them AND they never run out of resources because they have to account for your mill BS destroying half their deck and the rest of the deck is composed of removals and healthgains, games MAY be shorter vs your archetype but in the mirrors we go back to 40 minutes (and >50 cards) of nothing before the game SOMEHOW ends (these are not necessarly Archivist Elysiana warrior mirrors, just any game with 2 hypotetical decks that run any number of hypotetical "delay fatigue" cards that they NEED in order to have a chance to beat your strategy). Now is the point where you argue "just play a strong wincondition that actually ends the game" well that can get randomly burned too and (since you still have your deck FULL of reactive cards) it becomes absurdely easy to win from there...and so we go back to "did Rat work? yes--->nice I win, No--> sad I lose" which is,I think we can all agree, not fun as it makes the rest of the deck irrelevant. Now how about MORE winconditions?...so many that they are almost impossible to react to...well then how does your deck survive aggression if it needs to run enough ways to close the game that he is confident some of them won't get randomly discarded? You don't so you become just as polarizing as the deck you are trying to beat...making you toxic as well. 

Ok fine, I'll clarify some points as apparently my opinions got in the way of clarity about what I meant:

Before that though there is 1 thing you said that I REALLY can't stand: It appears you think I'm "hiding" behind big essays.
Now the sole reason my posts are this long is because I despise those that "read into" what others say instead of taking things as they are written/said (goes both ways btw, meaning I also hate those that write/talk like that) so I do everything I can to make sure nothing of what I say can be "left to interpretation" (I often fail,like in the previous post apparently, but hey...I try).

Now (finally) here we go:

I understand how I may have been...not fully clear on what I meant as I failed to draw a decent line between "I hate it/ I think it's a mistake/not fun" and "objectively bad design" so, to clarify: even though I hate and despise mill/OTK/disruption as concepts from the bottom of my heart and (if I had the power to do so) I would immediatly cancel them from human memory I do understand that there are those who like playing them (which is the reason why they are printed) HOWEVER what is an undeniable indicator of bad design is printing things that invalidate otherwise viable archetypes/playstyles as that forces people to either play in ways they don't enjoy or stop playing altoghether, you are effectlively killing diversity in your own game, one of the worst mistakes a developer can make since...well...less people play.
Contrary to other games however HS, given its nature , has a slight problem: mill/OTK mechanics often inherently do that (to higher or lesser extents) as the only way you have to interact with those decks (aside from RNG fiestas of "did Rat work?" which is...dare I say...not fun, wether you win or lose to it) is "kill them" which forces people into styles that either they don't enjoy or that some decks simply can't do with any amount of consistency.

On the "random elements" part:
Yes, given that I play wild exclusively ever since rise of shadows I HAVE met my fair share of big priests so I can safely say:
big priests CAN kill some (all was a bit much that's true but still...) of their first minions if they play things well, they do run removal after all and I've seen a few (that waited a couple turns to get mana) use it in a smart way by (e.g.) killing their own Archmage Vargoth or some copies of stuff from Shadow Essence immediatly (coincidentally, these are the games I actually lose vs them as they make sure they have a decent rez pool that I can't "pollute"). Even if that happened to not be possible though, they can also wait to get more good minions into the rez pool to improve their chances after you used your transform effects, maybe by playing or summoning copies of them or maybe with Eternal Servitude allowing them to chose the "not trash" ones before they start using the random resurrection cards.
Also I never said they can AVOID those cards, these are still REALLY good tech cards in the matchup, I did however say that nowadays big priest is LESS AFFECTED by DEVOLVE EFFECTS as they almost only run 9/10 drops. Now am I denying the fact that is is still VERY annoying and a pretty steep loss of power for them...no, not in the slightest, I'm just saying that it's not as much of a free win as you suggested.

Last small thing is that you STILL chose to ignore the fact that I never once claimed [REDACTEDTUS] is "the worst designed card" or "the biggest problem", it is merely the example you chose to defend mostly. Now is it my personally most hated?...well...idk honestly,but it's very close...what bugs me about it is that you can simply just put it in any control lock without even building your deck around it in the slightest and BAM congratulations, you now automatically win vs any deck that tries to survive your threats, you made yourself more vulnerable to aggression yes but still you get to autowin some matchups so...who's really losing here?.

Well, would you look at that, it only took you like...what....57 million lines of text but you finally stopped assuming what people play....progress ;)

Now that I'm done with the obligatory petty starting line that appears to be a ritual in your discussions:

First of all, in order to get [REDACTEDTUS] to work as an autowin vs slower decks you only need either Brann Bronzebeard or Zola the Gorgon which are 2 cards many renolocks would run anyway as they have many valuable minions that they'd like to play more than once. Yes,these are useless vs the strognest decks in the format (as they seem to all be aggressive unless I'm forgetting something) but that has never stopped renolocks from running AT LEAST 1 of the 2 (usually Zola iirc).
The more I read your posts the more I'm convinced you don't actually read mine: I specifically stated that [REDACTEDTUS] may even be a weak card and I am by no means saying he's the ONLY problem with the format (far from it actually but let's not go TOO hard in depth). What I AM saying however is that printing a card that can single...card...edly obliterate an archetype (ANY archetype mind you, it just so happens that the more reactive decks are more prone to getting dicked on by card design) is objectively bad for the game.
I also saw a line that gave me quite the chukle: "To take a small win here and there (and not exclusively because of [REDACTEDTUS]) against a controlish or combo deck"
Now from a superficial prospective that MAY be seen as true but:
Vs combo decks: you also have Dirty Rat and (SOME versions run it,at least the ones I've seen) Gnomeferatu but if the combo deck did not win yet (which CAN happen I admit) [REDACTEDTUS] is the more likely one to get the job done.
Vs control decks: [REDACTEDTUS] does not kill them directly obviously but his effect is slightly more subtle, you see renolock (the only deck I see running this card nowadays) has some meaningful pressure of his own with its huge boards,early manacheating and powerful deathrattle minions. Now normally your generic controlly deck is built in such a way that it can whitstand those boards BUT in order to win a value war vs them you need to match them card for card, you need ALL of your removals, ALL of your threats, ALL of your value generators AND (sometimes, happens more often than you think) you ALSO need a fatigue advantage (or at least not disadvantage) to outlast them after you (fking somehow) managed to resist all of its boards. Now this was perfectly fine, actually enjoable games that had both players able to react/threaten and the winner is (barring RNG BS) the one that,quite literally, played his cards right. The existance of [REDACTEDTUS] means that 1 or more of these requirements automatically fails making the matchup near impossible...if not completely impossible depending on various factors, now is [REDACTEDTUS] the one actually killing you? No BUT he IS the reason everything else managed to kill you as HE took away the resources you need to match a control lock (and don't even TRY to bring up the "cards in deck don't matter, just imagine they're at the bottom" argument, yes SOMETIMES the games will end earlier if they highroll but a control lock's pressure isn't THAT fast an matches are OFTEN decided by nearly the entire deck).

Now onto Zeph:
Your "wins out of nowhere" came from literally the most predictable part of HS: the basic/classic sets, do you maybe not know what's in there? Because if you do know what Zephrys the Great can give them...it becomes SO much easier to know what to expect and play around it accordingly. The powerful part is the flexibility but that is just the mark of a strong card (VERY strong card mind you), not a "fk your archetype" card.
I will not deny that Zeph is a VERY powerful card BUT there is NO (otherwise viable) deck/archetype that gets invalidated by him (unlike a certain 6 mana 8/8) AND every time he saves you or kills the opponent it's something that your opponent could have played aroud by ether saving enough reload or clearing/healing (there ARE situations where that may not be possible but that's with EVERY strong card...take Loatheb as an example).

You literally said it yourself, [REDACTEDTUS] is a "fk your archetype" type of card, and these are NEVER healthy. You said it may prevent a slow control meta and I say it makes sure NO reactive deck will ever see itself being meta because this idiot is there ruining its fun (I know it's not the ONLY one but you seem to argue mainly toward defending it so I'm using it as a "main" example). Now do I WANT a "slow control meta"...no, not at all...I just wish decks like those were playable, and [REDACTEDTUS] (together with other cards but let's not go TOO in depth) makes sure they are NOT.

My arguments come from the PoV that every archetpe should be realistically playable as long as it doesn't invalidate something else. To give you an example deathrattle/DKrexxar hunter in the boomsday/rasthakan era was one of, if not my favourite deck to play against AND IT WAS A HARD COUNTER...so why was it my favourite? Well it's because vs them the matchup was "realistically winnable" as you COULD power through the bullshit, however [REDACTEDTUS] matchups are more along the lines of "if I get lucky enough maybe I can bullshit myself out of this one" which is...dare I say...not fun.

As for the flip of a coin...I may have expressed it poorly so here we go again:
the metaphorical coniflip is supposed to happen during the game..where you have ways to "influence" its outcome AND you can enjoy yourself playing a game that is not already set in stone. When the coinflip happens BEFORE the game starts...now THAT's when problems start to arise.

wow you REALLY want to defend these shitpiles huh? here we go then (my apologies people from the future visiting this card's page...this will be quite long)

 You should play MTG then. It doesn't treat players like special snowflakes, with their special decks. Instead, it punches you in the face for even thinking that your "cool" "reactive" Hearthstone-esque deck is going to make it every time.

Well why do you think I DON'T play MTG...I'll let you figure it out with this 2 clues:

1)these are card games, and as such you are supposed to be able to play your cards

2)I like when both players have a way to react to what the other is doing AFTER he's done that, it makes it more fun for both parts when you get to play your cool combo/card and when you manage to power through the BS....I enjoy counterplay what can I say...

Disruption has many forms and discarding cards is one of them. I suppose the graveyard mechanic is what makes it balanced, but still there are decks that don't interact with graveyards a lot in MTG, so I consider this a situational arguement.

this is precisely what I said, the only reason that it's acceptable in MTG is thanks to mechanics like graveyard that keep it SOMEWHAT interactive for MOST decks that would lose to it

To me getting Tickatused is as annoying as playing Big Priest in Wild against Mages and Shamans. Suddenly your pool is fool (*full.....dw tho, I'm not the kind of bitch that points out typos to discredit points, this is just here to insult those who do that) of frogs and sheep and irrelevant minions and your expensive ressurects have no value. See? That's perspective. Now, should I say that transform effects are unhealthy for the game? Because as Tickatus destroys your "reactive-deck's" win conditions, so does devolve destroys a Big Priest's win conditions (And no, you can't win the game when you spend 7-9 mana to summon 2 murlocs and a pirate).

wrong argument:
1)as a big priest you have ways to kill your first minion of each type to make sure it is in the rez pool
2)you have TONS of ways to cheat out copied minions
3)mage/shaman do have transform effects but they have WAY less of those then you have threats (unless shaman wants to go ULTRA all in and lose all other matchup...that would be toxic too btw)
4)the newer big priest lists are not even THAT scared of devolving effects as they run 9/10 drops almost exclusively

So [REDACTEDTUS] is an uninteractable autowin vs any reactive/low pressure deck unlike transform effects that only give other decks a fighting chance to react to or kill big priest (also a decent big priest player will wait until he has had enough good minions die before he starts resurrecting) so...nice try but no.

I suggest that you play MTG in order to get over it. There are plenty forms of disruption that can make it to Hearthstone and some have already made it in. 'Member Shudderwock? Good luck if he manages to pull off half of the deck's shenanigans. You'd be furious too. But Shudderwock isn't in Standard, that's why you can't cry about it.

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TEACH YOU THIS LESSION OLD MAN?
Did I not JUST ask you to stop assuming when you clearly don't know shit? I play wild ever since Frost Lich Jaina (my favourite card in ANY card game) got rotated out and I can assure you that I hated the Shudderwock combo as it (like all other shitpile OTK/mill/infinite decks) ran an uninteractive train through anything that did not apply meaningful pressure throughout the game. It's not popular now as it is slower than basically any other combo deck in the format. (as a sidenote, I love the card, I think that without the "summon X copies" minions it would be one of the most fun cards in HS hystory)

And in all honesty. How often do you meet warlocks on the ladder? How often do they play Tickatus? And how often you actually lose immediately? Having played Tickatus decks at their best forms, I can tell you that they are a bit clunky. Unless you're playing against a completely pathetic reactive player, chances are that you will be stomped. Even in Wild some combo decks can escape you. Remember that Tickatus can be played as early as turn 7 (coin). Quest Mage can win by turn 6.

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TEACH YOU THIS LESSION OLD MAN?
Did I not JUST ask you to stop assuming when you clearly don't know shit? I play wild ever since Frost Lich Jaina (my favourite card in ANY card game) got rotated out.
Wild is where the card gets even more toxic thanks to either Brann Bronzebeard or Zola the Gorgon (or both if you're a bitch). How often do I meet warlocks? Quite often actually...painlock and zoolock are not uncommon, how often do I meet a warlock with [REDACTEDTUS]? Not much, only every single time I find a renolock so...100% more times then I should

Unless you're playing against a completely pathetic reactive player, chances are that you will be stomped.
Gotta love the "pathetc" thrown in there just to point out how much you hate counterplay...really helps get your points across. let me ask you this: why should there be cards that prevent you from playing an archetype?

Even in Wild some combo decks can escape you. Remember that Tickatus can be played as early as turn 7 (coin). Quest Mage can win by turn 6.
never said he's the only problem and also this proves you do not even read what I write as I clearly included OTKs into the toxic mix as they are also unreactable.

So your arguements are valid from your self-centered perspective, but that perspective does not reflect the game in whole.
So this line is so perfectly incorrect given what I discussed earlier that I won't even repeat myself.

Personally, a card like Zephrys is far more stupid than Tickatus. It can save you from nowhere and it can pull a win condition from nowhere. Does that mean that Zephrys is bad design? It is certainly worse than Tickatus, but is it unbalanced overall?

Zephrys the Great is one of the best cards in this game both in powerlevel and design: if used well it can get you out of *most* situations...BUT ONLY ONCE, it can find lethal for you BUT THE OPPONENT KNOWS THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE AND CAN DO EVERITHING IN HIS POWER TO PLAY AROUND IT, it can be a decent curve play if you fancy that for some reason and so much more...but it is never an automatic win, only a strong asset that gives you a good advantage. It is certainly a VERY powerful card but one that both players can play around with 100% consistency if they are good enough so... nice try but this is factually wrong.

It is certainly worse than Tickatus
you certainly know how to make people lough....Now is Zephrys the Great a stronger card then [REDACTEDTUS]? ohhh abso-fking-lutely but stronger does not mean toxic, actually in this case it's quite the opposite:
[REDACTEDTUS] is a toxic shitpile card PRECISELY BECAUSE it is not as strong as Zephrys the Great, if it was then it would have gotten nerfed to the ground as it would be both unfun AND super strong. As it now stands, from a purely balance prospective, the card is balanced, even weak maybe since it is a liability vs aggressive decks and an autowin vs slower/reactive decks.... but the faster decks are (by nature of HS) usually more popular. HOWEVER this doesn't mean it's a healthy card since it is encouraging "queue up--->identify opponent archetype--->either concede or watch them concede" which is..dare I say...not fun...I personally like to play the game not flip a coin to see who wins.

ok so:

First of all...no...stop assuming you know what people play because (spoiler alert) YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT...it is precisely because I play non greedy, non midrange, reactive decks (main focus is always survival) that I believe mill/disruption/OTKs are toxic to the game as NONE of them can be reacted to/survived and the only way to beat them is SMORC (aka you force someone away from an otherwise legit deck/playstyle into a playstyle they don't enjoy, which is a ballsflappingly stupid design philosophy).

Secondly while I never played MTG I am at least familiar with some  of the mechanics so: in that game (as far as I've heard) you have ways to actually interact with and react to these kinds of strategies making them a mistake still....but an acceptable one (ALSO if this happened to be wrong and MTG were to lack consistent ways to interact with this stuff that STILL wouldn't mean anything as a mistake is still a mistake, no matter how many people make it). Hearthstone on the other hand lacks even the most basic tools to interact with these kinds of cards/strategies AFTER they are played and, since counterplay is at the core of healthy game design, this makes the game not suited to print this kinds of cards (without making them toxic which kind of defeats the purpose).

THIS card (Far Watch Post) on the other hand is not only what disruption (or even mill to an extent) should mean but it is also the only way a mechanic similar to that is ever healthy in HS.

Also as a sidenote if disrupion/mill worked ONLY like I suggested in the previous paragraph I'd VERY likely play and enjoy those styles  as they fit my "annoy them to death" playstyle quite perfectly.

what I believe you were trying to say is:

"this is the only non toxic way to print disruption as that concept  (together with mill/OTK etc...) is a tumor spreading among card games at an alarming rate"

I can understand your typo there, given that you willingly play [REDACTEDTUS] this is the least I expect from you in terms of mistakes

do we really not know what the golem's abilities are yet?

THIS IS THE WAY YOU PRINT DISRUPTION CARDS BLIZZARD

Honestly I don't feel confident enough to call this great or trash but 1 thing is for sure: THIS is the way you print healthy disruption cards, the "disrupted" card is still playable, you're not removing anything...you're just ANNOYING them....I LOVE IT...yet OTKs or just simply strong synergistyc combos become more awkward to pull off.

EDIT:

wow, I think this is my most liked post, ty everyone for the positivity :)

Post barrens edit:

It appears the card was quite good...and quite annoying as predicted. I kinda missed the mark on the "disrupt OTK/combos part" as (at least in wild) this is used to enable aggro pally exclusively, I've seen it pop up here and there in slower standard decks too but I don't know enough about standard to say anything. Still this doesn't change the fact that, as a concept, THIS is the only way disruption is not toxic in HS (aka opponent's stuff costs X more, up to 10). Now let's hope it comes back in the next expansions/minisets to replace rat/[REDACTEDTUS] BS completely (print it as battlecry,deathrattle,frenzy,end of turn,OVERKILL it doesn't matter) 

Yes, I will judge you based on your ability to converse. It won’t change the validity of your opinion, but informs my decision whether to engage in the discussion or not.

That is Simply a wrong and short sighted PoV as you preclude yourself from seeing someone else's PoV and thoughts that May improve or expand your own

Sorry I can't "bold up" text on my phone, I'll try to separate your quotes from my answers

~Are you trying to say word choice doesn't matter? Because... wow... I mean you are entitled to your opinion and are allowed to be wrong, but seriously? Reading between the lines and little social cues are all we have to go on, since we are just a few lines of text to each other. The way you CHOOSE to say something is as important as what you say.~

Well that's not far from what I mean. Word choice matters....very little, as long you are easily understood and not offensive to other people you're fine.

 Your post highlights just how deeply radicated this issue is. Form is meaningless without substance while substance stands on its own just fine. You may argue that form may make the substance easier to consume BUT we are not in showbusiness, which is the ONLY "place" where that gains any amount of importance as you also aim to make things enjoyable to follow, so "easier to consume" is completely meaningless in our context (by showbusiness I mean things like books/movies/songs etc...).

~Information (even opinions are information) is only as valuable it's source so you how you choose to present yourself in going to be how we evaluate if what you say is worth reading.~

Information (even opinions are information) is only as VALUABLE as what it says. The way to present it is completely meaningless as long as it is easy to understand since a well presented, well "made" wrong argument STAYS wrong no matter how much you may try to shugarcoat it

~I am not trying to fix you; that is not my job. It us just what you said there goes so far against what I believe to be true that it hurt my brain.~

I am honestly not trying to fix you either, even though I am deeply convinced that your PoV is 100% wrong I also understand that such a radical shift in prospective is extremely hard, I am simply sharing my opinion.

And you are exactly proving my point: trying to evaluate someone's opinion or even personality/maturity by the way they express it rather than by what they are actually saying is exactly the problem AND an extremely short sighted narrow minded approach to a discussion AND a plague that is infecting our society.  A correct opinion is correct no matter the way it is expressed.

The only possibile VALUABLE counterargument you MAY try to bring up is being offensive to other people...still I never once offended actual people so....nope, goodbye.

Final note:

Now I KNOW that you (or someone else reading this post in disagreement with my views on the matter) will bring this up so it fills my mind, heart and soul with joy to shut you up even prior to you responding (as I despise people that try to do this from the bottom of my heart) :

You are about to try to discredit my previous statement using an empty argument you """""""found""""""" using stuff I never said but that  you wrongly believe I implied SO......

I am by no means implying that MY opinion that I espressed in any one of the posts I made is factually correct, all I'm saying is that ANY statement needs to be read/heard with your mind set to WHAT it is saying, rather than HOW and if said piece of writing happens to be correct you have no choice but to acknowledge that. Refer to the second paragraph before bringing "being offensive" into the mix.