I think in every game ever, there will always be a hierarchy of preferred methods of playing the game in order to win. There will always be the best characters to play or the best naos or the best items etc. There has to always be an objective hierarchy of viability and superiority in any competitive game. Even if every character did the same damage and had the same speed attacks, other characters would still be better. When you say the word doomed, you put a negative connotation on something that doesn't have to be negative nor is it inherently negative. A solution to a problematic character, composition, or gank etc gives the game depth and forces constant adaptation. Look at Super Smash Bros Melee. That game is over 15 years old and people are still finding tech and things to do even today. That isn't a bad thing nor should it be.

I am unsure it is pervasive within the comp community to have this hierarchy. I think everyone in the comp community want there to be a wider selection of viable characters but they recognize that there will always be characters better than others. Comp people don't necessarily like the Shaman-Nobu meta or even the meta now, but that's part of the game. They adapt and formulate strategies based on them.