I have been playing League since beta and I've played through plenty of dramatic changes to the game. I generally agree with "most" of the balance changes and I tend to open minded about even the questionable ones. Even when I am hesitant about big changes such as Gragas's rework or the yearly jungle rework, I give Riot the benefit of the doubt until I get my chance to personally test the changes. However, it is only easy to accept such changes because there are logical reasons for them. There are certain balance decisions in the game that infuriate me because they contradict Riot's past balance philosophies and stem from laziness or pressure rather than logic. This includes new champion releases that embody gameplay mechanics that caused other champions to be nerfed for, champions that have avoided reworks despite being "anti-fun", champions that have been nerfed despite a stronger "version" of them existing and Riot's staunch refusal to undo nerfs.
I am wholly aware that some of the champions mentioned here are either in the process of getting reworks or are being looked at. It does not change the fact that some of the inconsistencies brought up in the article have persisted for awhile and are worth bringing up for discussion. It is a bit "ranty" but there is a point in all of it. The first two parts of the article are topics that are often brought up on my stream and youtube channel so I figured I'd address them here. The third part is a problem with Riot's balance philosophy that I feel rather bothered with. Take each part as their own as there is only a loose connection between them. The article was also greatly inspired by the heated (positive and negative) discussion that Ciderhelm's Nidalee video caused.
A lot of this is hyperbole and personal opinion (it gets ranty) so do not take it as one of my usual analytic articles.