Why do dual wield WPS cap at 20% chance?

Why do both inquisitor and nightblade WPS skills cap at 20% proc? Is it because that’s the independent chance for each weapon, meaning it’s more like 40%, or am I missing something?

Thats the way they decided to balance the game. Also its only 20% not 40%.

Nah, they cap at 20% whether you go Dual Wield or not.

I get the feeling they’re fairly low as they intend for you to stack more than one WPS together so if you have a group of WPSes - X, Y, and Z at 20% each, you have a total 60% chance of proccing any one of them.

Doesn’t make much sense to me, since pretty much all the non DW wps cap at 25% and seem much stronger.

I can see the arguments for Feral Hunger being seen as ‘stronger’ - that life steal is incredible. But Markovian’s is bad and Zolhan’s is…well decent but it’s no Execute.

Also it makes sense that the DW pool skills would have a lower cap as there are more of them! Nightblade alone can get 80% pool skills, and Inquisitor can get 60%. Shaman has access to a whooping 25% and Soldier has 50%…if you take Markovian’s which again, why bother? (that defensive ability reduction doesn’t stack with Blindside fyi) When making a Cadence soldier I’ll usually toss a single point there just because it beats a standard attack and you might get 15% from just +skills carrying it.

We have very different opinions about MA and ZT. (Skillpoints is -2 due to relic bonuses)

Ah, but you are using it as DW - and correct me if I’m wrong (it’s been literally years sense I played a DW melee character) but isn’t MA a ‘both hands’ ability? He was asking specifically about two-handed pool skills, hence only one hit/one instance of physical damage.

Also was not taking into account the new skill mods, which I suppose I should have…

Most of the Nightblade WPS seem frin alright to excellent, but inquisitors seem downright… awful.

Bursting Round starts at 90% weapon damage, 11/12 phys/fire flat bonus. That goes up to 140%, 52/80. It has an aoe component, but it’s not exactly huge (4 meters).

For comparison, Zolhan’s goes to 25% chance, 175% weapon damage, and hits 3 targets, slows attack speed, and 168 trauma.

Necrotic edge (at 10/12 for fair comparison), 25% chance, 136% weapon damage, 4 targets, 76 cold, 339 vit decay.

Chilling Rounds is probably the weakest of the three. 20% chance, 82% weapon damage, 39/39 pierce/cold, 279 frostburn over 3, freeze for .7 seconds. It’s an unreliable slow that probably does less damage than a normal right click unless you’re itemizing for full frostburn dots. It’s also single target.

For comparison, Belgothians at 8/8 128% Weapon damage, 55-86 physical, +115% pierce, .7 stun, 3 targets.

Storm spread is 4 projectiles, 33% weapon damage, 28 piercing, 21-36 lightning, 108 electrocute. To make this less confusing, times it by 4 for if they all hit one target. 132% weapon damage, 112 piercing, 84-144 lightning, 432 electrocute. These numbers aren’t awful, but the 20% chance still makes it a lot less attractive than other mastery WPS. Also, it requires 40 points in inquisitor, making it more of a competitor to execution than other WPS skills, and it’s clearly weaker than that.

Ordinarily I’d say that ranged WPS skills should be weaker than the melee ones, but should they be that much weaker? Also, most people seem to think ranged DW is pretty weak in general in grim dawn, so should it really be the case?

If for some reason you want to spend 40 points on WPS skills, I can’t think of any time you’d want to spend most of them on inquisitor’s ones.

Chilling Rounds is probably the strongest WPS in the game at present. :confused:

You realize it fires off more than once, right? :stuck_out_tongue:

The dual wield WPS’s are on classes with 3-4 WPS’s, while the ones with 25%, are on classes with 2 WPS’s. They do this so that if you pick up all 3-4 WPS’s and another classes 1 or 2 skills, you don’t go over 100% too easily. At least that is my theory.

Actually it’s 246% weapon damage due to triple shoot.

Depends on weapon type. I believe 2H fires twice.

Care to explain?

How often does it fires off? And each time, it´s get all the benefits? :confused:

(Would each of the 3 attacks on Amarasta´s Quick Cut gain the benefits?..that would be…have to think about it). :wink:

I’ve tested this on a dummy, and I see no evidence of such claims. It is possible to fire twice in a row, but if it was a rule, it would happen every time.

Yes, that’s the whole idea of AQC. :slight_smile:

As I mentioned above, Chilling Rounds fires multiple times depending on your weapon selection.

Don’t think I’ve ever seen Chilling Rounds fire only once. I am 99% certain it fires twice for 2-handers, no idea for one handers.

Thanks. :slight_smile:

Tricked myself; thought about how the skill modifier from Mythical Brutallax would fit nicely on my build, but they won´t stack. :rolleyes:

The skillmodifier is 1200 Bleeding Damage/15sec. Does that mean 1200 per hit or 400 per hit?

Technically this depends on whether you attack slow enough to hit slowly enough that bleed ticks more than once within the span of three AQC attacks. :wink:

It’s 1200 damage per AQC trigger, for all practical purposes.

Because those classes have 3-4 WPS, while classes with WPS that cap at 25%, have 1-2 WPS.

No, I didn’t. It looks awful if it only fires off once, if it fires more it’s definitely a lot better (like, duh). I wish the tooltip mentioned that it fired more than once, especially since there’s some disagreement about it for 2H weapons apparently (never tried 2h ranged).

I tried out a DW pistol deceiver briefly that used some WPS and it was godawful, but that’s prob more because deceiver doesn’t really make sense right now unless you do the corrupted FoI, and I dislike how immobile using foi made me feel. It’s also awkward because you still do burning and electrocute damage with no conversion (not that you could, since chaos has no DoT).
(I wished that I could justify picking occulist for just the -elemental RR on vulnerability and blood of dreeg, but it’s not quite enough). Pretty much threw it into the trash bin.