Saying a Champion Does No Damage Does NOT Mean I Don't Understand Them
If you want to skip past the bitching, go past the quotes.
When people say a champion does "no damage," they are either saying:
A. They are used to a different play-style. B. One way is nerfed so they complain about it (what I do all the time) instead of playing it the more effective way. C. The champions are indeed trash. D. The damage scales horribly at some point in the game.
or
E. They don't know the champion and they're just causing a scene.
** WHICH IS NOT MY POINT!**
I've played thousands of games and it's safe to say I've played basically every champion in League of Legends. There's a reason why around 10 champions are not played the way they are suppose to. Most of their expected play styles are apparently completely irrelevant that in order to succeed in a game people have to play them completely differently.
I'm talking about Shaco, Corki, Ziggs, and even Urgot.
Shaco was played AD for a while and now he's mostly played AP. Corki is played in the MID lane because people SAY he's more effective there. Ziggs is now mostly played as an ADC. Urgot is mostly played in the top lane.
When I say Xerath, Aurelion Sol, Ziggs, and Urgot do "no damage" in the early game, I LITERALLY MEAN, THEY DO, NO F***ING DAMAGE! It's why I have to build half tank on Urgot to stay alive enough to deal enough damage. If you just so happen to start playing Ziggs and upgraded your Q first, you'll notice that it doesn't do more than around 80 magic damage at level 1. And in order to conserve mana, you'd only use this on minions, or when you're level 5 and it's rank 3 and then its safe to poke the enemy with it.
This is why Ziggs in the bot lane is so effective because the enemy adc is constantly behind minions on a curved lane where the mid lane is nice and long and it's easy to dodge stuff.
Now compare this to Lux, who only has 3 damaging abilities, 1 is an actual "skill shot", while Ziggs has 4 damaging abilities, all of them being skill shots. All she has to do is land a single Q and you're basically dead if you have below 60% health.
A utility mage does more damage than one with no utility, aside from a slow and knock-up.
Why are almost all champions that have abilities requiring no skill shots (or just 1 that isn't even hard to land) do more damage than ones that are really difficult to pull off and that some champions are completely reliant on them?
Damage wise...
Why are:

MORE PRACTICAL THAN:
...
is a perfect example of a champion with an ability that has a skill shot that's really hard to land and when you do land it, it's very rewarding. I remember when Nidalee was the bane of my existence when I began back in season 3, now I hardly see any skill shot champions being played. Probably because they DON'T DEAL ANY DAMAGE EARLY ON, and people don't like playing as skill shot champions when there are champions that are 10 times more effective.
There are some cases where I'd rather play
over
, since
has his true damage passive while
's 25% magic penetration passive was removed LONG AGO because what's the point? Why would I risk the game playing
since basically all of his skill shots are in a STRAIGHT line while
is more sophisticated and can help in ganks and team fights even if the enemy team is stacking magic resistance.
You know... ACTUALLY BE USEFUL TO THE TEAM!
By a champion being more sophisticated, I mean their passive is a lot more useful to their overall kit than some throwaway passive saying, "HERE, you get 12 mana by auto attacking every 12 seconds! Wow!"
WELL that's not going to help me at all if, for one, I'm buying mana items anyway, and two, a skill shot champion isn't going to get in melee range in the late game just to take 1 and half seconds to dish out an auto attack if you're then going to die immediately after.
99% of champion passives are actually useful to SOME extent. Who do you think is the other 1% besides Xerath?

It's just my opinion...
TL;DR, I want to see a
, and
in the mid lane again. Not your every day Assassin Mage/Fighter meta.