Damage calculation for dual wielding vs 2 handed weapon Options

[Mongerman]

To those who are interested, here are some damage calculations for dual wielding vs 2 handed weapons. Hopefully it will be helpful to those deliberating between the 2 different styles

Assume grandmastery patch is installed, and ignoring all additional elemental, save or die, effect triggered upon strike bonuses

Assume 22 str (+10 dmg)

Scenario 1

Ravager 1d10+6
str bonus + 10
GM bonus + 3
2 handed weapon style + 1

3 1/2 APR at lvl 13

Over 2 rounds = 7 X (16+10+3+1) = 210 dmg



Scenario 2

Dual wielding the truth / angurvadal + 4

Main hand
the truth 1d8+5
str bonus +10
GM bonus + 3

3 1/2 APR at lvl 13

Over 2 rounds = 7 x (13+10+3) = 182

Offhand
angurvadal 1d8+4
str bonus + 10
GM bonus + 3

1 APR

Over 2 rounds = 2 x (12+10+3) = 50

Total dmg = 182 + 50 = 232

If using belm in offhand

The truth dmg over 2 rounds = 8 X (13+10+3) = 208

Belm dmg over 2 rounds = 2 X (10+10+3) = 46

Total = 254

As can be seen, dual wielding trumps 2 handed weapons in dmg. The dmg disparity widens if you consider extra dmg factors like kensai bonuses, elemental dmg berserker bonuses etc etc, since the extra dmg is applied 1 extra time each round. Not to mention you get bonuses from 2 different weapons when you dual wield. And I'm not even using the best longsword in my calculations

Hope this has been useful, and will perhaps emphasize my idea that 2 handed weapon style needs to be improved =)

[Sikret]

1. Like I said, the calculation excluded all extra bonuses other then raw damage

I know, but in practice, it's not merely the raw damage which counts.

3. More chance to critical evens out in the end, since

20 attacks / 3 1/2 APR = 5.71 rounds
20 attacks / 4 1/2 APR = 4.44 rounds

So you do twice the number of criticals, but the cost is 1 round of attacks.

True, but there are certain enemies you can only hit with a critical.

This is one of the things which makes "Riskbreaker" a valid fighter kit in IA despite its numerous and serious disadvantages.