i think power comparisons between a high level wizard and a high level stp erudite are not an effective use of time. each has a different area of focus and competence, partly determined by options selected. both are powerful enough to short circuit a campaign if not restrained by player or dm ethics and/or morals. let's just drop it and move on.
and regardless of which may or may not be more powerful, unless one or all of those involved in this disagreement are willing to give a complete analysis including charts and spreadsheets of every possible option a wizard or psion could take with cross comparisons and references (i think feats alone are 2-3000 options) and well reasoned statements as to why each and every option is or is not a good choice and under what circumstances, etc, etc... i really think that everyone should simply agree to disagree like adults and move on. getting upset about it and using increasingly insulting and foul language seems a bit silly.
back on topic:
in playing a level one stp erudite i discovered that it was difficult to compare with other characters who have options and abilities that do not have a limited number of uses per day. receiving permission, i began using the linked power - metapower effect to effectively double my power points, and to partly offset that problem. I am personally limiting it by careful selection of effects and applications, so as to not make a pest of my character. This has worked well so far as allowing me to last longer in combat and for more combats.
however, having to use such a combo in the first place to achieve effectiveness highlights to me the oddness of the rules regarding the erudite, and makes me wonder how and why such a class would have evolved or been developed into existence in the first place. likewise, i find that i have to rely on mundane methods and the dm to provide me with detailed descriptions of surroundings to attempt to take advantage of, rather than being able to rely solely on my class features to succeed in encounters.
it seems to me that the way such a character could actually succeed solely on its own merits will depend on the nature of the campaign to some degree, but also by selecting a niche and sticking to it until the uppd limit broadens out enough to allow for flexibility. maybe blaster focus, or scout focus.
i also find that unless the character happens to have really good physical stats, that my ability to effectively participate in a typical campaign (50-60% combat, 40-50% rp) is severely limited in combat situations and slightly limited in rp situations at low levels. easy access to magic items or psionic items can offset this, but simply maintains or widens the gap between my character and other characters.
transparency rules, depending on how applied, also broaden my usability, enabling me to use psicraft and knowledge psionics to identify magical effects in a generic fashion. upd skill likewise doubling for umd is quite useful. other knowledge checks retain their usefulness to the party in identifying creatures and providing information to the party, assuming the points are spent.
in conclusion, my personal experiences are that the stp erudite is strongest in rp situations, but weak in combat, especially at low levels, unless offset by some other circumstance - items, stats, creative dm & player, powerful option combos, etc.. in small groups, this can be a problem at low levels, unless the dm tailors things a bit to the player circumstances. in larger groups, the erudite can make an interesting and flavorful secondary or tertiary character at low level, and like the wizard or psion, becoming very powerful at mid to high levels.
this particular campaign died when two of the players decided to take a break from rp for a while in favor of other rl stuff. the dm didn't want to continue as they had specifically designed events for each player in the party, and lost motivation with two of the events no longer relevant. the group, however, continues with two new campaigns alternately run by two others of the group.
