Well Yas Forums?

well Yas Forums?

Attached: gregege.png (488x402, 6.92K)

Sword literally every time. The mace is for retards who can't math

Am I fighting one guy or an army?

Depends on the type of game. If it's an MMO type game where your character is just auto attacking, the morning star has higher DPS. If it's a turn based game, spending a whole turn not attacking can mean death.

>2 hits equal 100% chance guhuh

Attached: AD2AE47A-DC9E-4D25-A012-A4BC407FF53A.jpg (1001x1024, 73.35K)

Sword for crowds, mace for bosses.

main hand mace, off hand sword, swing each one depending if i want overall dps or reliable damage to finish something off

Depends on what we are fighting. If i am fighting something with 100 or less health I take the sword every time. If I'm fighting something with 250 hp I would take the mace since I only need to hit once to ko it whereas sword would take 3 swings every time.

No context as to game or enemy, no discussion to be had.

It doesn't even say the crit rate

Sword because red swords are cool as hell

>sword
standard physical build
>mace
build around a spell that's modified by your physical damage so weapon hit chance becomes irrelevant

Well, Yas Forums?

Attached: which weapon 2.png (1796x1592, 116.56K)

1 boss = mace, many enemies = sword.

If there are upgrades, talents or buffs that increase accuracy then it would massively benefit the mace. If the armor formula works by subtraction then it also massively benefits the mace. The mace allows you to beat difficult enemies through sheer luck or savescumming, which can unlock rewards that are flat out impossible to obtain with the sword. The only game mechanic advantageous to the sword is on-hit effects, and sometimes these can proc on misses as long as the weapon is swung.

>One mace in each hand
>100% chance to hit

No, but 2000 hits means you should hit about 1000 times.
200,000 damage for sword.
250,000 damage expected for morning star.

Morningstars are my preferred weapon, so whenever I have a chance I'm using it.

I abuse the bug where accuracy is only checked by one weapon by placing sword in main hand and mace in off-hand to get 350 damage with 100% accuracy.

Attached: 1571834692203.png (545x582, 267.39K)

based math bro

Attached: 1580826687917.gif (560x560, 770.94K)

genius
fpbp
/thread

the virgin sword vs the chad mace

>swing twice
>miss twice
>die and reload
sword always

>Not fucking with your stats and skills to ensure max hit and crit.

Attached: FUCK RNG.jpg (3024x4032, 1.76M)

>swing twice
>hit twice
>enemy is still alive
>die and reload
mace always

>enemy has 225 hp
>sword needs 3 strikes to kill
>mace just needs 1
mace every time

>sword
>100% chance to do 200 damage over 2 turns
>mace
>25% chance to do 500 damage over 2 turns
>50% chance to do 250 damage over 2 turns
>25% chance to do 0 damage over 2 turns

mace has a 3/4 chance of being better than the sword in battles where the opponent has >100 HP

Hit chance is hard coded into the games clock. I clench the timing like a speedrunner high on estrogen and hit every time with the mace.

for real, you use the +accuracy buffs with the mace and reap the high damage.
+50% accuracy = 75% chance to hit
you're not gonna get +150% damage buffs in any game, so the sword is just inferior. and if you're using the sword, all your accuracy buff items are just sitting in your inventory being wasted.

Reliable damage is always more important, Sword.

In order to pick the sword, the enemies need low health, hits need to do something other than damage, or missing needs to put you in a disadvantageous position in some way.

With a 99% chance to hit, you could POTENTIALLY miss every single attack out of 10,000,000, but that isn't expected.

XCOM

If you counted up every attack you had ever made in games that are honest about their accuracy numbers, you would almost assuredly find that the number of successful hits lines up with the expected number of successful hits based on the sum accuracy of every attack. But missing a hit feels disproportionately bad compared to how good landing a feels. As a result, people tend to underrate their luck.

Probabilites are retarded. Even if you have 99,99999998% chances to hit, you'd still have the same chance to hit or miss every single strike out of 10 billions, it's literally luck.

even if you have 100% chance to hit the game could just glitch out and rewrite the code and miss

le 1/256 faec

Sword because fuck missing. I might consider mace if it does 500 damage or so.

Imagine being such a pleb that you can't manipulate rng. Macechads win again.

Depends on context of game, but if unknown sword.
This is because there might be on-hit effects that are contingent on hitting, there might be external damage modifiers, or benefits besides straight damage (flinch, interrupt) when you do hit things.

where's the "no random crit" stat?

Yeah, but think about this. One sword in each hand means a 200% chance to hit! Meaning two hits with each sword, so 4 hits total at 100% each... 400% damage!!!

You're a fucking retard. The mace would one shot anything the sword would one shot.

Berserker's big axe always

sword for more consistency. you can also abuse on crit effects more reliably

i like tricky things so tricky swords

The mace has a CHANCE to one shot anything the sword could one shot. Think before you post.

1/10. Here's a pity (you).

Mace, swords are for sissies.

mace on a str/luck build

Sword is more consistent, but you will do more dps with the mace, so it depends on whether combat is in real-time or turn-based. If turn-based, then sword is better. If real-time, mace is better,

kek

...

>implying maths even matter
The sword is better because it can't crap out on you at a critical moment and fuck you over. Worrying about average DPS over reliability is truly dumb.

Not how random number generation works. Plenty of times you'll miss with both, several times in a row even as the RNG is stuck in a low number rut.

Based and redpilled. Missing against mobs sucks ass because they go down fast anyway, but you'd have to have really shitty luck for the mace not to be better against a durable enemy.

If you're up against a superboss with a fuckhuge health bar, you will want to max out your dps as much as possible.

>standard issue halberd
>is some sort of non-standard bearded poleaxe

100% chance to hit
But also 100% chance to miss

>enemy has 80 defense
>longsword does 20 damage to them 100% of the time
>mace does 170 to them 50% of the time
yeah I'm thinking mace

Sword.

mace.

its cooler.

Wait how does crit work? Because if it's double damage, isn't hte mace always doing more damage even without crit?

what if it's not an action game but a management game where DPS is all that matters?

>missing hits
Get your outdated excuse for bad animations outta here and gimme my sword

It says hit, dyslexic-kun.

What’s the attack speed and crit rates?

Or you could just git gud and roll out with the sword.

What's crit damage?
What's attack speed?
What's element?
Bonus stats?

Attached: neromath.webm (640x460, 721.59K)

DEPENDS ON GAME!
If fights take more than 100 hits average like an MMORPG than the mace is mathematically the correct choice.
If the game is about shorter fights than you could make a strong argument for the sword not fucking you over.

In the end the mace is Chads choice. It deals more damage on average and thus it's mathematically correct to pick the mace. Only pessimists would pick the sword because they see 50% chance to hit as a 50% chance to miss and will kid themselves into thinking that the mace will miss more for them than it should.
A mace is also a cooler weapon.

Attached: Springfield invaders.jpg (1024x768, 336.32K)