Okay, putting my Warden hat on for just a sec:
There are times where League can feel utterly frustrating, and experiencing some particularly unfair gameplay can easily lead to questioning the developer's decisions, often rightly so. However, it is possible to disagree very strongly and still be civil, and that can be done by directing your anger at the game and the mechanics that annoy you (which you did), without insulting any actual people along the way (which you also did, and which isn't good). Rioters do read through these discussions, and what would be more useful would be to say "I really don't like this decision you made", rather than "I hate you and think you're an idiot because of this", the latter of which tends to degrade productive conversation and turn people away as a result. It is one thing to ask for accountability, and another entirely to look for a person doing their job to use as a punching bag. The devs have made some pretty awful decisions throughout League's history, and will likely fuck up many more times in the future, but at the end of it we're still all playing League and enjoying it (sometimes), and they do work hard to make sure the game keeps on thriving and improves over time, even if there are some missteps along the way. In the future, please try not to call anyone else on here an idiot.
Takes Warden hat off
I personally dislike many aspects of the Tank Update and its related reworks (including the Galio VGU, which I absolutely hate), because it really feels like that update ended up giving tanks less definition than before. Zac was always a generalist, but now has really strong CC on top of great mobility and decent damage, and the way his kit is built means he doesn't really trade reliability for his strengths either. I think it's fine for him to have lots of CC, because he's a vanguard and so is meant to be good at initiating, but he needs a lot more counterplay: his Q design definitely does feel short-sighted, as the idea likely was that Zac would use a skillshot on his main target and an enhanced auto on a minion or secondary target, but the reverse ended up happening in practice, removing much of the ability's interactivity. His current E is at odds with his new ult, as landing the full knockup prevents targets from moving out of his scoop zone, again removing a lot of counterplay. On top of all this, he still has bland spammy PBAoE damage on W, when that was exactly the kind of feature tanks as a class were criticized for having.
I think Q would end up being perfectly okay if it were two skillshots instead of one plus an auto, and lost the slow effect. W could still be spammy and use the blob collection game, but I'd prefer it to output soft CC instead of damage. E+R is a major conundrum, though, because the only two apparent options are to either nerf/remove the knockup on E (and hardcore Zac fans will hate this because the CC is an important part of landing E), or rework the new ult (which would feel terrible for anyone who just learned to use Zac's new kit). I speak as a non-main and someone with little experience with Zac, so I am very likely to be wrong on this, but I feel Zac's E is a bit too strong for how low on interactivity it can be: sure, if you're channelling out in the open you're giving the enemy plenty of time to react to you, but if you do it from a bush or out of vision range, which often happens with how long-ranged the ability is, and on a jungler too, your target can get completely screwed without really having the appropriate time or options to anticipate it. It's kind of the same problem as with Nidalee's spear, where the mechanic of a long-ranged ability becoming stronger as it travels kinda clashes with the fog of war and limited vision, and can lead to situations where you get chunked without really feeling like you could've outplayed the effect. Because of this, I would support limiting the knockup to 0.5 seconds, and possibly reducing/removing its damage (though that might be overkill).
every time hostilities are afoot....then die.
