So I stumbled across this a little late (on another thread, and then tracked you back to this one), but it's something that is near and dear to my heart (as someone who loves critiquing and reviewing ideas and concepts). Figured it was worth resurrecting it to offer some thoughts, especially as this is actually something I've considered doing before, but didn't know if there was any interest in. Responded to you directly, BowieTheNifty, so you could see this.
#Discussion Time Allotment
You spend a lot of time on Base Stats, which are largely the least important part of a kit, since they're the easiest to change. A simple overview might be sufficient here, just to get an idea of how the champion is supposed to play (and commenting on any severe outliers).
I know I was growing bored during some of those segments: there's not really a lot of meaningful discussion going on at these points. Especially since one or two of them actually seemed to spend MORE time overall on base stats than on anything else. You're also discussing them (at least on Karvia) AFTER the abilities, meaning you weren't keeping the base stats in mind while looking at her abilities.
#Overall Analysis
I don't think you discuss HOW the kit functions enough. You've discussed themes, but you're pretty light on actual in-depth analysis of what the champion does, what it adds, and how it does it.
Things to discuss: character/role fantasy, kit/lore/fantasy cohesion, desired gameplay outputs, unique gameplay niches, gameplay flow...the list goes on.
Definitely some good stuff here, but I'd say you're sometimes only digging on the surface -- you're discussing what is written, but not always what it means, what it COULD be, how it could improve, whether or not it hits the target fantasy, and a bunch of other really important stuff that goes into champion design.
