Sorry to jump in sorta here, and this may have been mentioned already but I don't see it in a quick scan...but if I recall MM has a far higher base damage by about 40ish over Shadow, which will mean it does as much effective damage, and probably more in the long run, than Shadow....when you take enemy armor into account. Can't just multiply hit%*time*base damage and say "Shadow does way more damage than MM". I tried once on an Archer comparison, and was smacked with the Holy Mackerel of Knowledge because it doesn't take enemy armor values into effect.
I am making up an example (and very simplified not taking crit at all into consideration)
100 hits, MM 79% hit, Shadow 100% (again, making up)
Enemy armor = 50.
MM base damage 220 = (79 successful hits)*(220-50) = 13,430 effective damage.
Shadow base damage 180 = (100 successful hits)*(180-50) = 13,000 effective damage.
Tie, in my over-simplified, no buff/debuff/crit example. Adding Crit in would certainly be a factor in Shadow's favor, but I woul dbet that if one sat down with the numbers, simplified weapon damage numbers would be closer than intially posted. The weapon speeds also play a role to some extent in figuring true damage from weapons, I think Royce or Phys has the real equation for it.
Again, my apologies of this has already been accounted for, just hadn't seen this addressed in the thread yet, and I will take a solid lashing with a wet spaghetti noodle if it has been discussed
just something to maybe consider in your considerations on which gear you end up with.
Bookmarks