Gadgeteer - battle tactics
Posted: Mon May 02, 2011 8:11 am
I was wondering how people approach the Gadgeteer class, and if they actually utilize the Gadgeteer's combat abilities.
Every time I try to work Stun-Gas into my repertoire I always feel that I'd be much better off hitting my for, than trying to nerf him.
Stun-Gas has a 20% to 30% stun rate. I usually don't have any SP in it, so it only stuns 1 out of every 5 times. And the stun only prevents getting hit that round -- not the next round. So really it only means you get to nerf your opponent for free 1/5th of the time. 4/5ths of the time you pay for it by getting hit. So, is reducing toHit and Offense by 5 (to 10) worth the price of getting hit for 80% foe damage (80% - 5offense, whatever that translates to)?
I guess it would depend how many rounds it takes you to kill the baddie vs. how many stuns it takes to drop his toHit below your dodging ability.
It usually takes me no more than 2-3 hits to bring a guy down. So, let's say he gets 2 hits on me (200%). For 6PP I can reduce that by 40%, but still not necessarily ensure he's not going to hit me in the following 2-3 rounds. But for the sake of argument, say 6PP is enough to take him to where he can't hit me. Is that 40% damage more or less than 1 cast of First-Aid (15HP, though I'm much more likely to put SP points here since the skill is universally useful). So, the foe has to be doing at least 23dam per round AND the toHit needs to be 10 away from unhitable. And of course, I haven't even addressed Critical Hits.
Maybe my math or logic is all screwy, but I just don't see how this is worth it. At 10SP, the comparison is 45HP for First-Aid, or 53dam per round AND toHit needs to be 20 away from unhitable.
Shock-grenade seems to have similar problems and a very high PP cost.
Does anyone use these on a regular basis?
Every time I try to work Stun-Gas into my repertoire I always feel that I'd be much better off hitting my for, than trying to nerf him.
Stun-Gas has a 20% to 30% stun rate. I usually don't have any SP in it, so it only stuns 1 out of every 5 times. And the stun only prevents getting hit that round -- not the next round. So really it only means you get to nerf your opponent for free 1/5th of the time. 4/5ths of the time you pay for it by getting hit. So, is reducing toHit and Offense by 5 (to 10) worth the price of getting hit for 80% foe damage (80% - 5offense, whatever that translates to)?
I guess it would depend how many rounds it takes you to kill the baddie vs. how many stuns it takes to drop his toHit below your dodging ability.
It usually takes me no more than 2-3 hits to bring a guy down. So, let's say he gets 2 hits on me (200%). For 6PP I can reduce that by 40%, but still not necessarily ensure he's not going to hit me in the following 2-3 rounds. But for the sake of argument, say 6PP is enough to take him to where he can't hit me. Is that 40% damage more or less than 1 cast of First-Aid (15HP, though I'm much more likely to put SP points here since the skill is universally useful). So, the foe has to be doing at least 23dam per round AND the toHit needs to be 10 away from unhitable. And of course, I haven't even addressed Critical Hits.
Maybe my math or logic is all screwy, but I just don't see how this is worth it. At 10SP, the comparison is 45HP for First-Aid, or 53dam per round AND toHit needs to be 20 away from unhitable.
Shock-grenade seems to have similar problems and a very high PP cost.
Does anyone use these on a regular basis?