Yeah, absolutely. I think as long as the skill ceiling remains incredibly high (but there's a decent challenge when learning to initially just survive, and a good learning/depth curve instead of a cliff), it's okay if some characters are a bit more powerful than others at theoretical maximum skill levels or if some characters are a bit more powerful than others for button-mashers.
Definitely agree that more damage = more style is a bad thing, though the way Bayonetta handles it (basically less damage = more style because it's almost purely per-move, to the point that the weakest/fastest weapons are far and away the best ones for generating combo points) has its own problems with incentives too.
I do understand, on a base level, that from a design perspective if you're knocking half of an enemy's life bar off with a single move, there's an incentive to award more style points if only so you make sure each player can get roughly the same expected mean/median amount of Style off of a given amount of enemy HP. But this also runs counter to the design impulse to make all moves cancellable and flexible and so on. There needs to be a risk/reward factor to these things or else bigger damage moves end up being strictly superior in *all* senses. Maybe heavier damage moves should do more to make you vulnerable somehow (even more than they already do). I'm okay with heavier damage moves giving more style *per hit* than faster, lower damage moves, but if dealing 300HP in a single move gives you 300 style, dealing 300HP with five different (and varied) moves should net you like 500-600 style points. Dealing 300HP with one weak easily-executed move five times should give you like 200 Style.
It's obviously a good thing that hitting more targets and using more variety in your moves results in more Style. That's something DMC gets totally right (outside of vanilla DmC).
