My Mechanic isn't gimped, your Artificer is OP

[HastyPudding]

You confuse me OP. You're comparing dying on a boat in winter with playing an assassin? then saying everyone else is doing it? Even if that made sense....

Anyhow feel free to ignore a great class, but please refrain from attacking it until you've played it.

If you even bothered to understand what parody and analogy is you'd have found it made perfect sense. Apparently you don't understand humor, either. Please refrain from attacking anything you don't know about, then, as well. That should keep you busy doing nothing all day.

People talk about how boring barbarians and paladins are, not having played them, and nobody says a word to them, do they? Because what they has say has a ring of truth to it.

Unless, of course, you enjoy barbarians or paladins. This just proves my point that some people like different things and dislike others, which appears to be the moral of this thread.

[Syllph]

If you even bothered to understand what parody and analogy is you'd have found it made perfect sense. Apparently you don't understand humor, either. Please refrain from attacking anything you don't know about, then, as well. That should keep you busy doing nothing all day.

People talk about how boring barbarians and paladins are, not having played them, and nobody says a word to them, do they? Because what they has say has a ring of truth to it.

Unless, of course, you enjoy barbarians or paladins. This just proves my point that some people like different things and dislike others, which appears to be the moral of this thread.

We're discussing assassins and Artificers are we not? How did you change the topic to Barbs and Paladins? How does dying on a boat in winter form an analogy how criticizing a class you've never played make sense? I'm not trying to be rude I'm trying to figure you out. Stick to one topic, shall we discuss Paladins and Barbarians, or artis and assassins? Avoiding a question doesn't strengthen your argument.

Dying on a boat doesn't sound like humor to me. I have no clue what winter, dying, or a boat have any relavence to asking you a simple quesiton: How can you say you don't like artificer when you've never tried. Roll one up. Play it. Then comment. Then I would have total support for you. I don't care if you like mechanic over Arti, but at least have a valid opinion. You don't own the class, that's why you're upset. I'm not arguing one is better than the other, I have my preference, but that's stylistic and biased. You have no valid opinion. You've never tried arti.

Fact: You've never played an artificer.

You make claims saying you prefer your mechanic, but you've never even tried an arti. You say you know you won't like them because you watch other people play them. That doesn't make sense.

Watching some random pugs and playing the class are very different things. I've played both mechanics and artificers, and I can tell you from personal experience which one I prefer and why. You then criticize my choice when you have never even once tried the class.

You've said repeatedly, that an arti is basically a rogue mechanic but better. I agree, it's more powerful. How exactly is that something you wouldn't like? You've said arti is OP about nine times, in this thread and others - then say you don't want to play one. Really you mean you don't have access to them and are upset that a pay-to-play class is superior to your free-to-play class.

Several people in here supported you saying you are free to like a mechanic, though I'm probably sure they assumed you tried both and discovered you prefer one over the other. In reality, you are jealous (you made a thread (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=398994) saying they are OP and gave suggestions how to make mechanic better. That's jealousy.)

I have a rogue mechanic, right now. I was in a party yesterday and 2 people couldn't grasp the concept of why I wasn't an assassin or artificer. They literally could not wrap their tiny little minds around why I wouldn't find an assassin fun, even after I told them that I didn't find the whole assassin/ninja thing to be a fun way to play.

You don't have access to them and are complaining about that - not that you prefer mechanics. Try making a new thread stating what you've said here: I've never played an arti but I know I won't like them Mechanics are better. Anyone who disagrees is small minded.

See how well that goes for gaining support.

[NovaNZ]

Shame that what started as a decent OP (pros/con Mech) has disintergrated into a epeen boogie-monster hunt.

IBTL

[Syllph]

Shame that what started as a decent OP (pros/con Mech) has disintergrated into a epeen boogie-monster hunt.

IBTL

You realize the OP never tried the class and and instead is attacking it because he doesn't own it right? The OP called two players small minded for suggesting that he try the class before criticizing it, and that's a decent OP? That's hypocritical in my books.

[HastyPudding]

We're discussing assassins and Artificers are we not? How did you change the topic to Barbs and Paladins? How does dying on a boat in winter form an analogy how criticizing a class you've never played make sense? I'm not trying to be rude I'm trying to figure you out. Stick to one topic, shall we discuss Paladins and Barbarians, or artis and assassins? Avoiding a question doesn't strengthen your argument.

Dying on a boat doesn't sound like humor to me. I have no clue what winter, dying, or a boat have any relavence to asking you a simple quesiton: How can you say you don't like artificer when you've never tried. Roll one up. Play it. Then comment. Then I would have total support for you. I don't care if you like mechanic over Arti, but at least have a valid opinion. You don't own the class, that's why you're upset. I'm not arguing one is better than the other, I have my preference, but that's stylistic and biased. You have no valid opinion. You've never tried arti.

Fact: You've never played an artificer.

You make claims saying you prefer your mechanic, but you've never even tried an arti. You say you know you won't like them because you watch other people play them. That doesn't make sense.

Watching some random pugs and playing the class are very different things. I've played both mechanics and artificers, and I can tell you from personal experience which one I prefer and why. You then criticize my choice when you have never even once tried the class.

You've said repeatedly, that an arti is basically a rogue mechanic but better. I agree, it's more powerful. How exactly is that something you wouldn't like? You've said arti is OP about nine times, in this thread and others - then say you don't want to play one. Really you mean you don't have access to them and are upset that a pay-to-play class is superior to your free-to-play class.

Several people in here supported you saying you are free to like a mechanic, though I'm probably sure they assumed you tried both and discovered you prefer one over the other. In reality, you are jealous (you made a thread (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=398994) saying they are OP and gave suggestions how to make mechanic better. That's jealousy.)



You don't have access to them and are complaining about that - not that you prefer mechanics. Try making a new thread stating what you've said here: I've never played an arti but I know I won't like them Mechanics are better. Anyone who disagrees is small minded.

See how well that goes for gaining support.

Your entire post is a complete and utter misunderstanding of what I said.

1. I was in a party with 2 people that couldn't grasp the concept of why I wasn't an assassin rogue. I said I enjoyed mechanic as a ranged class and the whole assassin/ninja didn't appeal to me. They couldn't understand this, no matter what I said. What is so hard to believe about not liking a particular style? Not everyone likes the whole idea of being an assassin. Don't make me out to be the victim because they're small minded.


2. I enjoy classes that are stealthy and ranged (like a mechanic). If deepwood sniper wasn't so broken I would be playing that, instead. I didn't want to be an artificer due to them not naturally acquiring evasion/improved evasion without heavily multiclassing, and I do enjoy sneak attacks and stealth, which they don't have. As I'm kind of a purist, I didn't want to get the artificer class and then do some 12/8 build or something. THUS, I picked a mechanic. People see a mechanic and they immediately say 'why not artificer?' Well, this is why I did it; that and the character itself is ranged-only, so ranger past lives would be next to useless on an assassin or acrobat. I might eventually do some artificer lives, but for the most part, it's rogue and ranger, maybe a monkcher life to spice things up.


3. I'm not jealous of the artificer. I'm angry at the artificer for being what it is and the developers being short-sighted and not thinking long-term. I couldn't care less about what an artificer does compared to my mechanic, but I dislike that they basically do things better due to the developers.


4. Analogies, mate. Learn what they are, because you honestly don't understand what I said, which makes perfect sense. Maybe not the BEST analogy for the situation, but still the same difference. Your lack of comprehension on this subject has completely derailed the topic. I don't mean that to be offensive, but you completely misunderstood what it was I said.

[HastyPudding]

You realize the OP never tried the class and and instead is attacking it because he doesn't own it right? The OP called two players small minded for suggesting that he try the class before criticizing it, and that's a decent OP? That's hypocritical in my books.

The 2 people in question said NOTHING about this in respect to assassin vs mechanic. They understood mechanic and not artificer, but they didn't understand mechanic over an assassin. Once again, you totally misunderstood what I said.

[Failedlegend]

look Hasty I love Repeater Rogues too but they really are UP, I've played both and before Arties were released Mechs were the best way to be a good repeater (Bards were fine too and quite fun but really only excepted because most parties what a bard does beyond singing) but they could NEVER compare to Manyshotting AAs or Melee.

Arties are a bit OP the first few levels due to the doggie but it balances out quickly after that it really only holds its own if it can manage the dog, the rune arm, his spells AND his Xbow well which takes alot of skill. At that point it can just about reach the level of melees but is still looked down upon in general especially In epic.

Ranged in general needs work (and no Devs give us bonuses for not moving doesnt count, IMO its entirely counter intuitive to the play style...if I wanted to stand in place taking turns attacking each other I'd play LOTRO) Mechanics and Deepwood snipers need work on top of that....Battle Engineer is fine where it is and hopeful the full PrE will keep being awesome

So in short Arty is not OP its right where it should be, Ranged combat in general is UP and Mechs/DWSs are even more UP.

[Artos_Fabril]

Go pure. Cheat death cap stone rocks !!!

Just want to note: I think this is the only time in the history of DDO Rogues that those words have ever been spoken.

[Todkaninchen]

Aside from FVS, it's the easiest class to get, seeing as you can get it from favor by just buying the House C pack and using free challenge tokens.

It's just the artificer almost completely overshadows the mechanic, and almost forces rogues to become an acrobat or assassin. So, basically, the artificer is a mechanic v2.0:

Mechanic - has access to light repeaters at level 6 and heavy repeaters at level 12
Artificer - has access to light and heavy repeaters and great crossbows at level 1

Mechanic - has INT bonus to damage with crossbows and repeaters at level 6
Artificer - can pick between INT bonus to damage or to-hit on the fly for any crossbow or melee weapon

Mechanic - has access to the defender pet regardless of race
Artificer - has its own defender pet that becomes markedly stronger than any other defender

Mechanic - specializes in detecting/disabling/evading traps and opening locks
Artificer - can do everything a mechanic can do in this arena except evading traps, only difference is mechanic has a slight bonus to trap-based skills

Mechanic - traps they make through the trapmaking feat have increased DC's
Artificer - has the ability to make traps like rogues


The only real advantage the mechanic really has is:
- +4 disable device, search, spot, open lock, and repair (negligible, at best; other rogue PrE's have no trouble with traps)
- increased DC's on traps made with trapmaking (situational use; more for fun than anything else)
- improved evasion without multiclassing (which isn't mechanic-only but for all rogues)
- a very small increase to elemental resistances (+2)
- high saves vs traps (+4 with mechanic II, and +12 including rogue enhancements which is almost obligatory)
- sneak attack damage (again, for all rogues, not just mechanics, and this is balanced out by the artificer's runearm and doesn't work when you have aggro)

Actually, unless you're standing still, rune arm damage doesn't outweigh sneak attack damage. Additionally, a rogue mech doesn't have to deal with taking many of the metamagic and magic-focused feats nor the augment summons which is practically required for a workable dog at higher levels. This means more feats aimed at breaking enemy fortification, survival (like toughness), or plain old damage.

Additionally, you're having to spend a lot of AP on spell casting traits if you want to be viable with a rune arm. For that matter, on AP, both classes can offset equipment requirements through AP use. The differences are mainly how many directions you have to spend on as an Arti compared to a rogue mech.

So, mobility is a big difference between the two. Stealth--mainly for getting into position with a rogue mech--as well as not needing to manage the dog, your positional spells, and the movement penalty from a charged rune arm means a rogue mech often just moves where they can hit and can usually avoid some extra damage to them and increase damage more flexibly.

While you're technical assessment is correct on the limits, the actual compromises required of an arti are often more costly than a rogue when it comes to balance and actual playability. You could maximize trapping on an arti, but it will bite into your build somewhere else, possibly survival or casting.

Oh, and the bolt level. They don't add to the bow (battle engineer does), but that simply means an arti can get a maximum of +2 over a mech (assuming a battle engineer bonus on the highest enhancement level bow equipable at that level). Otherwise, it's up to the gearing and the actual bow used. Even then, for the same plus levels, if a rogue can equip a bow that increases the likelihood of sneak attack (or the effectiveness of it like nightshade venom), that +2 damage a hit gets seriously offset.

So, as long as it's something that sneak attack doesn't work on (with fortification reduced), the only way an arti is getting more DPS is by either burning a lot of SP (with a lot of added feats to boost spell DC's and spell power) or by rendering himself/herself significantly less mobile which means--if they aren't sucking up the enemy aggro--they're losing more damage moving out of point blank/sneak attack range anyway.

Really, rogue mech--other than having to buy bolts--is the "easy button" on traps and repeater ranged fighting compared to the ongoing fight against the build, the situation, logistics, spell casting, dog management, traps, etc. an arti has to pull off to do the same amount and possibly incrementally more damage than a mech. Don't get me wrong, I love my arti and my rogue mechs, but the logistics of running and gearing an arti typically means leveling one at a time compared to multiple mechs. Even with the gear requirements.

[Deathdefy]

I'm in 100% complete agreement with the OP and made a similar thread when the same revelation occurred to me
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=364970 .

Incidentally, ad hominem attacks are dumb.

In discussions, criticize arguments. If someone's arguments are bad, explain why, and if you think that points to someone's lack of experience it can then be appropriate to say so.

Saying someone has a lack of experience and therefore their arguments are invalid is faulty logic, as evidenced by the OP's completely spot-on observations about the Artificer class.

Potentially IBTL, but I'd be disappointed if that were the case since Mech really does need some love.

[Paleus]

I think there argument of this thread misses the mark in two ways.

1) If people in the game are insulting your class choice, then the problem isnt with your class and another class. The problem is that some people have no class. The thread subject could instead be: "Its a game, so I play what I like to play." The forums have several posts about having to deal with with rude people.

2) To call a class/prestige underpowered vs overpowered requires considering all classes in the game. I could say that defender of siberys paladins are overpowered against deepwood snipers and probably be correct. But no one in their right mind thinks we should nerf paladins. Instead we should buff deepwood snipers. Same is true here. I dont find artificers to be particularly overpowered in the overall game, rather mechanics are underpowered. Focusing the discussion on improving mechanics without simultaneously arguing a need to nerf artificers just makes more sense to me personally.

[nibel]

I say a general rule is less than 400 HP at lvl 20 is grounds for a LR.

120 Base
20 Heroic Durability
40 Starting con 14
60 +6 con item
20 +2 con tome
30 Greater False Life
22 Toughness feat
20 Toughness enhancements
20 Toughness item (Minos)
45 Tier 3 GS HP item
============
397 HP and need to LR to what?

[Todkaninchen]

120 Base
20 Heroic Durability
40 Starting con 14
60 +6 con item
20 +2 con tome
30 Greater False Life
22 Toughness feat
20 Toughness enhancements
20 Toughness item (Minos)
45 Tier 3 GS HP item
============
397 HP and need to LR to what?

Maybe he's suggesting the only races for Arti should be Dwarves and Warforged? (+2 starting CON, 2 enhancements boosting CON, and 4 levels of racial toughness)

I mean, if you want to sacrifice UMD a bit and spend the 36 AP to do so while gimping either casting, runearm use, or skills, you could milk another 40 HP plus whatever +2 (or is it +3?) CON enhancements and (probably) +2 CON during creation. Three Barbarian past lives might also do it (30HP passive and 20 for the Active)... You could get an Arti-tank.

Only 36AP, an extra feat (2 total with a single toughness), and 3 barbarian trips to 20 and you can add 50+ HP...