I think you're mistaking the point that Riot's writers have been trying to push over the last couple months. Having a deep character doesn't mean they need to be a tragic character, but evil for evil's sake has its strengths and weaknesses. It's not about "Mordekaiser was abused as a kid and wants revenge on the world." but it's about the deeper motivations behind them.
For example, Noxus is our example of a Meritocracy, a place where you're judged on your ability, and achievements. Power too, since that usually shows itself in being 'The best'. Mordekaisers simple philosophy could be extremely simple, but pose a deeper question. He's a believer in the Meritocracy, but to such a far and radical extent, that he believes the world should be ruled under his boot, because, he is the most fit, accomplished, and powerful to rule it. And if he loses along the way, it wasn't meant to be, but that won't stop him from selling his soul in order to pursue it.
Ideologically, he shares the same philosophy as the common Noxian, but it's transitioned so far into radical extremes, that it's almost unrecognizable. Without making Mordekaiser tragic, you're left to question the downsides of the Meritocracy philosophy. Is it right for the weak to be trodden upon, because they're weak? Does it excuse cruelty and malicious acts if it proves that you are the most accomplished, the most powerful, the most capable to rule? You've made him a deeper character, without the need for sympathy, or making him truly 'evil for evil's sake'.
The final option in depth: What is a kingdom under Mordekaiser like? Would those he conquer, if they choose to serve the most powerful, and capable, leader, live earnest and good lives? Is it okay to conquer and murder the world as long as you're a fine ruler of it afterwards, as long as you're the one in control? Are they oppressed 24/7 to prevent rebellion? Why would he keep those oppressed, if not because of a character flaw within him. Paranoia that someone will come to surpass him, a belief that those who can't rise should make the ground upon they walk, something that a better writer could think up, we dunno.
The mistake I keep seeing here, is that Pure evil = Simple, which isn't the case. Even Sauron, in his rise of top-villain status, was the result of a fallen Maiar. It's completely fine to have a character who wishes to destroy the world, but it has to stem from a solid foundation outside of pure evil, like a misshapened belief that 'this is the only way for humanity to survive' or something deeper. You don't need tragedy to make a solid villain, but it helps make them relatable. And that's what we want, relatable villains.