Top laners are the type of people who would cry that blocking in a fighting game is unfair, that sniper rifles and camping in an FPS is unfair, and that type differences in Pokemon are unfair. They want the game played their way which is anything that isn't someone elses.
If ranged top laners are dominating, why don't they play a ranged top laner? "Nonono, top lanes are for bruisers and melees and skill..." yeah, that's some BS right there. Like those who still play a game they despise, they won't change and it is their fault, not to say their complaints have no merit, but have they actually tried to counter range with range?
No?
I'm not saying how you should play, but realize that if something is bad and something is good, why are you dead set on proving that bad is better than what is OBJECTIVELY superior? I used to hate metas yet have gotten a bit more used to the fact that what is fun and what is strong are two very different ideas. In a competitive game, you want to take any and all advantages you can take. By refusing to accept it, there's nobody's fault except their own should they continue to stay stuck in a rut of their own undoing.
Mid lane meta changes, jungle sometimes changes, bot and support has changed, yet top lane has to be immune from any simply because it's a haven of people who hate magic, range, and burst? How is that fair logic?
Besides that, they whine about no tanks as well as complaining that there are tanks, you literally cannot make them happy at all unless the other two lanes are removed and the only viable champs are melee fightters with no abilities that provide a bonus (attack speed buff, armor break, animation cancels, etc.)
TL;DR - play a ranged top lane champion, make Lucian / Kai'Sa, hell even Kalista viable. All you need to do is make either mid or bot lane tankier. Don't take this as legit advice, just tossing an idea out there as I'm not anywhere near qualified to make strategic decisions based on no foreknowledge.
