I've been playing Angband 3.0 off and on for several years now, but I just had the idea to see if there has been any work done on the game and found 3.5. I've liked it so far, but the new way weapon damage is displayed confuses me. I used to just see a 2d4 and figure it's automatically better than 1d4 and that's that. But now I have three weapons I'm looking at and I could use a little help knowing which one is the best.
First, a Tulwar: 2d4 (+3,+5)
1.6 blows per round.
Average damage/round: 28.8
Second, a Dagger: 1d4 (+1,+0)
3.7 blows/round.
Average damage/round: 35.1
Third, a Main Gauche: 1d5 (+0,+0)
3.7 blows/round.
Average damage/round 37
The average damage/round implies that the Main Gauche is the best weapon, followed by Dagger and then Tulwar. I would have thought Tulwar was the best followed by Dagger and then Main Gauche. Completely the opposite.
Is that what I should be looking at when comparing weapons, or is it more complicated, and if so, what should I do to figure out which one to use?
First, a Tulwar: 2d4 (+3,+5)
1.6 blows per round.
Average damage/round: 28.8
Second, a Dagger: 1d4 (+1,+0)
3.7 blows/round.
Average damage/round: 35.1
Third, a Main Gauche: 1d5 (+0,+0)
3.7 blows/round.
Average damage/round 37
The average damage/round implies that the Main Gauche is the best weapon, followed by Dagger and then Tulwar. I would have thought Tulwar was the best followed by Dagger and then Main Gauche. Completely the opposite.
Is that what I should be looking at when comparing weapons, or is it more complicated, and if so, what should I do to figure out which one to use?
Comment