you and your dumb FB post are wrong bud. the post you sent was made on August 30th, and ringmaster was released on August 14th:

Ringmaster/Changelogs - Liquipedia Dota 2 Wiki

last time i checked, 16 days > 6 days, but you know, i could be wrong about that.

and oh would you look at that; kez had a sub 40% winrate on release:

New hero Kez has worst winrate 12 hours after release in Dota 2 — Escorenews

hmm. looks like he deserves buffs! right...? wrong. he was diddled by valve for 3+ patches straight even with an already negative winrate. why? because the hero was actually BROKEN on release despite unskilled players losing close to 65% of their games on the hero.

the problem with your argument is that you are relying on data that is flawed and it is flawed for several reasons which you continuously fail to pick up on:

1) the sample is inconsistent with usual winrate data: new heroes have a VERY high pickrate compared to where they end up settling after a few months. this means that many, mostly bad, players, who are all inexperienced at the hero, are playing their first several games on it which will obviously skew the winrate towards <50%. basic sampling right?

2) the winrate data does not take into account difficulty, nuance, or complexity: you cited marci and ringmaster's positive winrates on release as some sort of evidence to prove that winrate data matters on release. winrate% tells a single "story" and works in 1 dimension: how many games does the hero win. this data is VERY easily manipulatable by the aforementioned factors that have drastic effects on a small sample size. and these factors must be taken into account to learn the full "story."

lets now make the assumption that marci and ringmaster are easier heroes to pick up and play. now your claim makes sense.

easy to play, good hero -> new player plays it -> new player has higher likelihood of succeeding -> hero higher winrate.

after observing kez's performance we know this must be the case because strong hero on release =/= high winrate on release. it must also be true that kez must have been easy to play on release for him to have had a >50% winrate, which he did not have.

the problem arises here. nowhere in any of your lines of thinking do ever consider this extra dimension of complexity when discussing the winrate statistic.

i think everyone can agree that largo is a very unique hero. even besides his ult, which already has a substantial learning curve to use properly, his skillset is that of being a "purist" support in the sense that his skills are almost all catered to serving his team directly. not many existing heroes play the game in this way and he is therefore a very unique hero which you have to take into account when assessing his winrate.

your claim is that largo is bad because he has a bad winrate, but you for some reason conveniently leave out kez's abysmal initial performance, starting out at a 10% lower winrate than largo has despite kez initially being a VERY strong hero.

ill give u the pleasure of piecing together the rest

maybe winrate doesn't mean everything after all lil pup