Mister Fixer Underpowered?

So in a group of 3 tonight, we played 2 games with Wraith, Mister Fixer (MF), and Bunker. After both games the buddy who played MF and myself were a little perplexed. His Forms and tools are cool, but he doesn't get enough damage instances to use them much, only has a single 1 damage power, and a couple of his forms/tools appear to be better in most circumstances. He has a couple control options, but from what we saw he appeared pretty underpowered for being mostly a damage dealer (and somewhat meh at that). Is this the case or are we missing something?

Thanks!

I think this is the thread you're looking for.

http://sentinelsofthemultiverse.com/forum/topic/does-mister-fixer-need-fixing

Play him against Apostate.  His Alternating Tiger Claw tears chunks out of Apostate's Relics.  I'll admit that I've been very frustrated by Fixer's low damage output in the past, but he has only gotten better as more Villains have come out.

 I said a lot on the other thread, but in general, yes I feel fixer is weaker than most heroes.   He's fun,  I enjoy playing him, but he needs a lot of help to be effective.   I would reccomend playing him alongside a dedicated buffer hero, like Legacy or Argent Adept.   This makes him a bit more useful.  

I'll second that.  Legacy helps for obvious reasons (Galvanize/Inspiring Presence), but Argent Adept can help a lot too, especially when paired with Hoist Chain.

Mr Fixer is a surgeon. Or a commando. He is very effective at getting rid of this one target that makes the villain more powerful. Especially those who confer damage resistance to all villain targets. Fixer's irreducible damage (or ability to make all damage on a given target irreducible) and Tire iron are tools made to destroy these buggers. Impressive ? No. Effective ? Ho yes. Breaking the defenses of the ennemy is always good.

Sometimes Fixer shines - like when he can get rid of all the minions brought back by a Forced Deployment, including Genebound Guards, with just one strike. Or when he cancels the protective drug of Spite each turn with a timely use of Bloody Knuckles on the "makes all damage to that target irreducible" style. Or when he changes Plague Rat's Infection into a weapon against Plague Rat. All this without external help. With some help, I've seen him destroy all the limbs brought by a primeval eruption with Overdrive.

He is not easy to play, but not "underpowered" once you understand what he does best : "fix" the ennemy's shtick to make the team more effective. And don't fear to use Bloody Knuckles. This card's whole point is not to make him impressive, but to help reach the exact amount of damage he needs to do right now what needs to be done.

Few people say that Visionary, for instance, is weak - because it is easy to understand her "role" in the team, and it is not damage. Mr Fixer is also a support character, but his role is less obvious : doing just the right amount of damage to get rid of a target who makes the team weaker. He is a target controller, where others are "ongoing" controllers.

I had a hard time with him, at first. It all "clicked" in a fight against the Chairman - my first win against him. The first time I really began to ask myself, each turn, what was the most efficient thing I could do for the team.

So, you could say that he Fixes situations…? Blammo! 

In all seriousness, I think he's a good team player. Salvage yard is amazing against villians who like to destroy your stuff, and also gives you a decent damage boost for the turn if you've already played overdrive.I do agree with SoundofTrees. Try him out with that in mind, and you'll be waxing those villians on and off with impunity.

Yeah, I can also agree with the fact that Mr Fixer is a great help in a whole load of situations. Some examples in which I personally have found him very useful...

Against Plague Rat - If you get Infected, make sure you have Driving Mantis Style up, which lets you just redirect the damage to a target of your choice (Plague Rat, or his Locus if you haven't destroyed that yet, unless there are any environment targets you want to hit - Rat has no otehr targets in his deck). Just make sure your damage hasn't been buffed so that the Infection damage is more than two points, or you can't redirect it.

Against Spite - If Spite has out the "when you use a power, take two damage and discard the top five cards of your deck" and the "Spite's damage dealt is +1" drugs, this means that when you use a power, you take three damage, more than you can redirect with Driving Mantis Style. However, Pipe Wrench reduces all damage taken by Mr Fixer. So you can reduce and thus redirect this damage, again using the Driving Mantis Style. Not so good if Spite hasn't flipped (he takes the damage but instantly heals), but at least then all you're doing is basically nullifying the damage completely rather than having your own hp go down and/or Spite's go up :).

Other cases I can think of where Mr Fixer would be useful (but I haven't got round to trying yet - so many combinations in this game!), are, as mentioend, against Apostate's relics, or indeed against anyone else who gets any kind of damage soak, such as Baron Blade with his Living Force Fields. I think some of the Citizens of the Sun have soak too, as does one of Gloomweaver's cultists. And you can freely switch tools every turn (since the tool being replaced just goes back into your hand). I think there are two of every style card in his deck, plus at least two Meditation cards you can use to get out the style you want and stick it straight into play. He's easy to set up - you only really end up with three regular cards in play - a tool, a style, and Harmony. Stuff like Grease Gun and Bloody Knuckles are probably a bit more situational, but very useful under the right circumstances :D. Also, as mentioned, he can help everyone else get their stuff out of the trash if something's destroyed it - yay for Bunker or Ab'Zero :D.

Or just get jack handle out and never worry about damaging yourself or other heroes again

I find Mr Fixer one of the more dependable characters, who has almost always something to contribute. Though yeah, sometimes luck screws with you and you never see any tool or style and all you draw are bloody knuckles after bloody knuckles.

And he really shines with damage boosts and out of turn plays/power use.

I think that is the best way to explain how he is not one of the weaker heroes. Wonderful!

Who would you say is one of the weaker heroes?

N/A

Each hero is perfectly viable in their own right. They each have a different role, so measuring any of them by the others' standards is an excercise in futility.

Really, it boils down to there being a couple that are really powerful and varied (Tempest, Wraith, NightMist) and everyone who isn't them is one of the "weaker" heroes.

For the sake of reason, we should precisely define what we mean by "weaker" or "underpowered" each time we want to use the word.

If "weaker" means "does less damage" then Argent Adept is seriously underpowered.

If having abilities that destroy ongoing or environment cards is the criterium you use, Ra and Haka are among the weaklings.

Any judgement of the level of "power" of a hero is made along a specific scale, using specific criteria. On this scale, it may be true, and we all would agree - but using another scale of evalutation, results would be very, very different.

It was a joint message from the Society for the Preservation and Encouragement of Non-Aristotelician Thought Processes, and the Misunderstood Heroes Rook City Fan Club.

I understand it is hard to compare.  The text I quoted from lynkfox seemed to indicate he thought there were some weaker heroes.  So I wanted to know which ones.

That's how I understood your post, flamethrower49 - but it took me so long to understand what bugged me in these conversations about Mr Fixer and Expatriette (and others at different points in time) that I had to formulate it.

What is "underpowered" ? When I use this word for a hero, do I mean he is inherently weak - or that I have not found yet the way to play him to his strengths ?

Do all heroes evaluate the same situation the same way, or should our tactical analysis of a given fight be completely different with some heroes ? For instance, I one day understood that Ra doesn't evaluate Environment and Villain Ongoins cards the same way as other heroes, as they can make him stronger (in this game, Ra was able to destroy Dawn because no one could destroy her ongoings !).

SotM always surprises me : I am always finding new tactics, new uses for old cards, ways to change apparent weaknesses into strengths... Suddenly, you understand something you didn't, and you find yourself playing in a completely different way - and you can't find a way to explain this change of tactics clearly to other players. Like when you stop caring about modules when playing AZ, or stop seeing Omnicanon as a goal but just as a tool you will or not put into play depending on the circonstances.

heh if you’ve been following the thread in general you’d see I do not think there are any weaker heroes. In fact I think they are all pretty strong. some may have a broader application than others but none are inherently weaker than another. just different and may require a different playstyle

I have been following the (various) threads, which is why your phrasing caught me off guard.  That's all. 

 It just bugs me to hear:

"Fixer is not one of the weaker heros"

followed by

"There ARE no weaker heroes."

I think that one of these two statements is made in bad faith.   If the second one is your belief, than why don't you just say that up front instead of saying "he's not one of the weaker heroes" which implies that there ARE weaker heroes, and Fixer is not one of them.  If the first statement is more in line with your thinking, than the second is just a cover up because you can't answer the follow up question  (who is weaker than fixer?).

What do I define as weak?   Well it's the opposite of powerful.   What do I define as powerful?   The heroes most likely to help you win the game.   (what other definition could there be?).    I have NEVER stated that heroes should be evaluated purely in terms of straight up damage output.  Does Mr. Fixer win more games than say,   Tempest or Tachyon?   I doubt it.  

I used to be heavily into Arkham Horror.   I still love it but I've now gravitated towards games that are a bit less of a time investment.  Anyway,   in Arkham Horror there are different investigators who have different powers, and on the Fantasy Flight forums there is a really wicked thread that just straight up charts a variety of different things.   Among them you can see the Investegators with the highest win%, as well as the Ancient Ones (villians) with the highest win%.     This makes it pretty nice and easy to see who is on top (Patrice Hathaway) and who is on bottom (Vincent Lee).     For those of you who don't play the game, Patrice is not exactly a monster slayer, not a huge damage dealer, but her special ability is pretty much second-to-none in terms of winning the game. 

That's how SotM heroes should be evaluated.   Ultimately:  DO THEY WIN?   Yes they are part of a team.   In A-H you're part of a team too, but if you play enough games, see enough reports, you start to see trends.   Patrice tends to win,   Vincent tends to lose.  Legacy tends to win, more than other heroes.    Fixer (and Expatriette, and Bunker) tends to lose more than other heroes.  That's been my experience. 

Ooh, a chart tracking which heroes won how many games against which villains, across hundreds of players, would be great to see.

awp you’re misunderstanding my post. I was referring to the fact that sound of tree s statement was a perfect rebuttal to anyone saying fixer is a weak hero. my belief is as I stated in my second post. I do not believe any heroes to be inherently weaker than another. Even by your win rate comparison. In the few games we have lost in my Playgroup (and the truth is we don’t loose often) its usually been a bad draw by the villain that does us in. or the environment takes a heavy toll. I cannot recall a game where I looked at our loss and said ‘well if we’d had wraith instead of expat we’ve won.’

I can say ‘if we’d had more deck control’ or ‘if we’d had more damage’ but those usually come out of randomized games, with all support heroes or all pure damage against a controller.

it’s entirely possible that I could be wrong. I only have my groups games once a week to go by. We don’t have an arkham horror style statistics thread (maybe you could start one? seems like a fun project) but in that same vein you only have your experience. As I said in the other thread were going to have to agree to disagree until someone starts making cold hard statistics. because my experience shows me none of the heroes are weaker on a general basis than another

I think heroes have niches. My problem with fixer? He lacks a niche. There are always heroes I want more in a game than fixer. Sure, you can claim that Blood Knuckles is great bait vs. Spite, or that he gets better with buffs, but none of this really is exemplary of Fixer. He appears to be a jack of all trades, but I sure as hell want Wraith around far more than fixer, in nearly every circumstance. Fixer, IMO, seriously lacks a niche. Also, I totally agree with awp832. Certain heroes win more games. And spiff, that would be awesome, and really interesting stats to see.

Fixer is for specific personalities. Yeah, if you want to constantly do things, play Wraith (or Tachyon ). But if you're in a zen mood and want to just enjoy a straight game of being the guy with the solution to the situation, Fixer is probably your go-to guy.

One of the most interesting things about this game, in my opinion, is that the heroes have personality. We like those that most fit with our personalities.

But not all heroes should fit with our individual personality, or everyone else won't have a hero to enjoy.

Bam.  Demand for a statistics thread.  This is a slippery slope for my obsessions, but I'm in the long-haul for the strategy guides anyway.  Count me in.

I have no idea how to begin, though.  Would any programmer-type people be willing to help me with a basic input form that would detail this information that I could then compile?  Any statistician willing to take on this task themselves?  I would help any way I can, because it sounds like that could yield some very interesting information.

Villain

Heroes, in play order

Environment

(Choose one) Not Advanced? Advanced Side A? Advanced Side B? Advanced Both?

Win?

There are probably some other questions we could ask, but this would be the basic form.  Thoughts?

I'm thinking, bouncing off what you said flame, something like this

Villain (A) (B) (AB)                    (Advanced Side A, B, Or Both)

(# Number of Heroes) Hero1, Hero 2, Hero 3, Hero 4

Environment

Win/Lose

Second the statistics.

Villian O/A/B/AB (looks like his/her blood group)

And strictly no house rules!

So, like tonight's game was

Citizen Dawn O

Tachyon, Nightmist, Unity, Mr. Fixer

Insula Primalis

Win

But damn was it close.

If you wouldn't mind reposting this, I'll make a new thread!

I begin to wonder if our evaluation of heroes depends also of the way we chose heroes, villains and environment. I mostly use Spiff's randomizer for everything, except with unexperienced players. It may give a very different image of any given hero, as they routinely find themselves in sub-optimal situations. It would be worth its own discussion thread.

As for the statistics : good idea. I'll add my games, with comments, and more precise supplemental datas when available. And will try to put together some tools for analysis.

I feel like heroes like wraith and visionary have a knack for surviving suboptimal situations though, may just be my opinion though.

Agreed, zelink551, but it can become a "self fulfilling prophecy" : I think Wraith is always good, so I always chose Wraith, and give more chances for Wraith to shine - and get more experience playing her. If I think Expat or Mr Fixer are bad, I tend t play them only in the few situations I think they may help, as son give them less chances to shine, and gain less XP using their decks.

From a "statistical" point of view, I am wondering if the "not-random" and "random" setup players would have the same opinions of heroes, villains, specific cards or combos, etc.

The same thing came up gathering statistics in the Arkham Horror thread.  The solution is to add a line asking if they chose the setup, if it was a random selection, or other.  If you want to take a look a the sweet setup for the Arkham people, this is it.  I would love it if we could come up with some kind of input form like that.  (I logged so many games on that form!  It appears I'm still the fourth-highest ranked submitter...)

I'm just trying to get the ball rolling :) And my signature is my current favorites to play, not my "favorites" in terms of best.

So something along the lines of this?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApaVTp-7PJbQdF85eVZRQnBOX3FPQW9JQUcyM2FKdkE

Its really raw, and I understand not everything works, I threw it out there again, so this community can adapt it, get it to, idk, actually work :), and then utilize it.

I'm sorry, but Mr. Fixer is the worst hero, however you want to define worst. A lot of people point to his low damage output and lack of ongoing and equipment destruction. Others counter those points with cases when he is good. But, the fundamental problem that everyone is missing is once he has a stance and a tool in play he has 16 cards (19 if you count Meditation) in his deck that he can't play without getting rid of one of them. That sucks no matter what situation he is in because using your play phase to put a tool into play and then losing a tool from play is hugely inefficient. The only other hero that comes close to this inefficiency is once AZ has both modules he has 6 cards in his deck he can't play. I've argued against AZ before and don't want to restart that because Fixer is so much worse.

Mr. Fixer has to have a way to use his extra cards. I've played where we allowed him to have up to two stances in play. That was a lot of fun.

I also love The_Jakey's suggestion on http://sentinelsofthemultiverse.com/forum/topic/does-mister-fixer-need-fixing. It lets him choose the right tool or stance at one time, but change it up later without wasting a play phase.

He suggests: "All styles, like tools, return to your hand if you put another style into play. Strike: You may play a tool or style. Deal one target 1 melee damage."

My suggestion is: "Strike: You may discard any number of cards. Mr. Fixer deals one target X melee damage where X=the number of cards discarded plus 1."

In my previous post I didn't make it clear that only one of the three suggestions should be used. Either two stances OR The_Jakey's idea OR discard to boost. All three together would make him way too good. I want a balanced game because the close battles are always the most fun. I dislike over powered heroes just as much as under powered ones. If this was a post about Tempest and Wraith being too good I'd be just as vehement.

I will try to say things less vehemently than you, and then will mortify myself by becoming a simple lurker.

Mr Fixer is not an easy hero to understand. He asks for a very specific way of thinking, for tactics very different from what we use with most other heroes.

His two card structure, and the number of replacement in his hand, make him very resilient to ongoing/equipment destruction. If he loses something vital, Meditation and Salvage Yard allow him to get it back easily. He does not need a big hand, and so easily sacrifices it for the sake of the team when discards are needed.

The trick with him is not to keep the same styles and tools for all the game - he changes them as needed. He is a Zen guy, and is not emotionaly attached to his cards .

This is not anecdotal evidence : it is the way I, and some others, play him, and by playing this way, what at first seems to be unbearable weaknesses are outshined by his strengths.

He is not the only hero that can seem weak, or counterintuitive, at first, until you understand how he is "supposed" to work. Absolute Zero is seen by some as a weakling, by others as one of the more potent heroes in the game. Many players have conceded that they thought Nightmist bad at first, because of her self inflicted damage and her habit to discard cards. Tachyon and Unity both discard many of their cards without using them, to power their own tactics. All the heroes ask for you to take the right "state of mind" to play them effectively. Mr Fixer's role and tactics are one of the harder to grasp (Expatriette too, it seems).

For me, discovering the "good" way to use what he has was a puzzle I enjoyed solving (and I don't think I've entirely grasped it yet). And I will repeat it vehemently : he is now a hero I enjoy having in a team, not a dead weight.

Of course, we can change his power, to make him easier to play. But I find more interesting to compare our ideas and tactics about how to best use what he already has. Both Fixer and Expatriette are challenging heroes, yes, but very gratifying once you understand them.

But you are firmly convinced Mr Fixer is simply a bad hero, and I know I won't change your mind. So I'd better activate Stealth.

*clap clap* Well said. Sound. Well Said. Some heroes require a different way of thinking. Better said and much more polite then I would have managed! XD

While I don't think Fixer is outright bad, his deck does feel a little grab bag compared to the other heroes.  Is there a solid reason why the guy can't look for Equipment cards of any kind in his deck?  Salvage Yard doesn't do much good if he never draws any Equipment...

Thematically speaking, his stances should not go to the trash. If he moves to a new stance he doesn't forget the old one. He gets his tools back, right? Those are physical objects. He shouldn't lose the ability to stand a certain way. Things like Sedative Flechettes or Devastating Aurora removing his stances make sense because they screw with the heroes' minds. But, at the very minimum, playing a new stance should return the old one to your hand.

Too be fair, the only way he can activate them again is by meditation, which can take things into the trash. He might need a lot of consentration to be able to do all that crazy stuff. But that's probably just me. Semantics!