Character balancing, thoughts?

[quote=theBMB]I pulled this quote out of the "Design status of characters thread": [quote] RiotStatikk: "It really comes down to a philosophy here: do we want champions to all have a similar power curve? Do we want all of our champions to all be strong early game, mid game, and late game? Or do we want to mix up the curve and make tradeoffs?"[/quote] This is really interesting to me because players always cry about the areas where their champions are weak, especially if a champ has a weak or overly strong early game (or overly strong late game). But now that I think about it, strength during different phases of the game is a key element to not only making distinctions between champs of a similar role, but also in determining composition of teams. If you have a team full of champs who are really strong in the early game, then you better win in twenty minutes or you're screwed. But at what point can you stop and really say "this character is unbalanced" purely based on their strength during different phases of the game? Thoughts?[/quote]

[quote=Rudmed]I personally think champions ought to have power curves, unless of course it hurts the team more then helps them. I brought this up with [[Leblanc]], and as I said then she puts a time limit on the game. If I do well as LB, that is good and all, though if my team can't catch up or help then the game is basically over. So certain characters will do well at points, but past that their team will probaly need to pick up the pace, in order to ensure victory.[/quote]

[quote=JunSupport]Everyone gets attached to certain champions. Everyone wants their favorite champion to be viable and a good choice. So they can play them as much as they want without getting any hassle. Therefore, some people just want their champions to be effective in all portions of the game. Otherwise, there will always be people who complain. Carries naturally take time to ramp up, but if they take too long, like pre-rework [[Kayle]] did, then people stop playing because it's just too difficult. Nukes generally become awesome upon level6, and everyone loves that. However, they need to have decent late-game utility. Otherwise there will be many games where they feel they're useless because the enemy too good for an early game snowball effect. Like [[LeBlanc]]. Also, next time, if you can help it, post in the Design status thread. I'd really like to keep that thread afloat.[/quote]

[quote=theBMB]ya, I was going to, but I thought this point was interesting enough to make its own thread. But ya, it's true, most roles have a defined time period as to when they are strong. Carries are good late game, AP Nukes are good mid game, junglers are good early game, etc. The thing is, the characters who deviate from their role's pattern tend to not be as viable. For example, cait's early game is really strong, but she's still not considered as good as ashe or corki because her late game is weaker compared to them. She technically fills the same role but is viable in different parts of the game.[/quote]