Blade Adept Arcanist>Magus?

[Crazysaneman]

Is it just me or is the Blade Adept archetype for the new Arcanist class FAR superior to the magus? You lose some stuff the Magus gets that can make them a melee monster, but most of it you can take in lieu of, or as, an Arcanist exploit. However, you do get all Knowledge skills, and 9th level spells and Arcanist exploits (which by and large are amazing.). Seriously, am I missing something?
At 20th level the power difference is so massive, I don't even know where to start. In addition to having 9th level spells and amazing abilities; you can consume all you spells to add points to your arcane reservoir then use those points (through magical supremacy) to cast any spell you prepared. That gives you (without any bonus prepared spells) 180 points in your arcane pool. To spend on spells as you see fit. Wait, what? The only real question here is why aren't you using the Metamaxing (spend 1 point to add metamagic to a spell without increasing casting time but raising the level). Or you know what? Just prepare spells with metamagic so when you consume them the levels are already set aside for metamagic use? Or get your DM to rule that you can use metamagic on spells from your reservoir. Wow man, just wow. Spending spell levels.

Need 20 9th level spells per day? We got this. As a melee mage. With a super powered blade O death.
Granted that's not until 20th level. But still. Damn.
Please someone tell me this is wrong. Please tell me that I'm not reading this correctly, or that I'm completely off base here.

CONS
Worse HD
Worse Fort
No Intimidate
No Ride
No Swim
Lose several Magus abilities

PROS
9th level spells
Knowledge (ALL)
Linguistics
Arcanist Exploits
Arcane Reservoir
Consume Spells
Magical Supremecy

[Deadkitten]

Forgot about the BAB, it stays the same and that's gonna hurt for the early levels until you find a way to mitigate it.

[Bhaakon]

It is strictly superior to a magus, and for that same reason that a properly-planned out eldritch knight was far superior to the magus in the long run: because of access to higher level spells. The magus is probably the better choice for the first coupes levels, and holds it own for a few more, but it falls behind and finds itself lapped on raw power long before level 20.

That being said, I'd sooner play a magus than either because there's just much more synergy between its casting and melee abilities. The class feels like a magical warrior instead of a mage who is slumming it with a sword as a lark. If you can cast 9th level arcane spells, every round you waste making a melee attack is doing your opponent a favor, so why are you waving around that big steel handicap?

[StreamOfTheSky]

Well, to be fair, the Arcanist is strictly better than EVERY class.

[Crazysaneman]

Well, to be fair, the Arcanist is strictly better than EVERY class.
Touche, good sir.

[AttilaTheGeek]

Well, to be fair, the Arcanist is strictly better than EVERY class.

It's true. I'm in the process of running a numbers comparison between different gish builds (Blade Adept Arcanist, Wizard/Fighter/Eldritch Knight, Sorcerer/Paladin/Eldritch Knight, Strength Magus, and Bloodrager) to see how effective they are numerically compared to each other. At least at low levels (I've done comparisons for 4 and 8 so far), the Arcanist is actually really weak in comparison because it has a low BAB and no armor. That will be made up for at high levels by Bracers of Armor and some items of +DEX, but a Magus could probably beat up an Arcanist in a one-on-one fight at level 7 or below. That is, assuming neither prepared for the conflict.