Talk:Yasuo/@comment-25562166-20150317181650/@comment-24496127-20150330070113

I'm not saying they're right on balance, I'm saying stop calling him broken. Calling a champion "broken" is the weakest arguement you could possibly make for anything. You know why? Cause you can argue any champ as broken if you don't like something about them.

Xerath is broken, he stays at max range and kills you in two abilities. You can't even get close because of a stun.

Riven is broken, spammable low cd mobility, freaking op shield that scales with ad, and an aoe execute.

Urgot is broken, has a mana scaling shield, and if he hits one e he bullies you out of lane. Not to mention his ult makes getting ganked an instant death.

All these champions are disgustingly poorly designed, made to cause frustration with little counterplay. Riot themselves didn't know how to nerf urgot so now he's useless late game but toxic and unbeatable early. For Xerath, they gave him stupid mana costs so he can't just spam all day, but that made him useless, and so the window to fight him is...when he goes to autoattack something? Such incredible counterplay for a champion that sits 9001 units back.

Not even ganna explain Riven, one kills is gg, she gets none she loses. Such great intuitive design.

These aren't my actual views by the way, feel a need to say that before someone tries to argue. Just wanted to show that saying something is "broken" makes any conversation from that point entirely meaningless. As, in a game like League of Legends, broken is extremely subjective.