Hello everyone,
I was looking to make a build utilizing strength and ranged combat on Mugenmonkey when I noticed this odd detail. According to the Mugenmonkey's AR Calculator, Gough's Greatbow deals 258 damage at 47 strength and 20 dex without factoring in arrows. However, when you put in 27 strength and 40 dex, it yields 286 damage,even though the weapon scales at B with strength and C with dexterity
When I put these stats into the actual Mugenmonkey Character Planner with Gough's arrows equipped, 47 strength with 20 dex deals 471 damage while 27 strength and 40 dex deals 523 damage. From reading some other posts before, it would seem that Mugenmonkey has been wrong before (ex. factoring in arrow damage twice). However, even more odd is that a 47/20 composite bow with large arrows deals 385 damage while a 27/40 deals 438, even though it scales both dex and strength at equally at C (via Mugenmonkey character planner).
Do bows have an innately higher Dex scaling that isn't shown, or is the Mugenmonkey planner just completely wrong?
I was looking to make a build utilizing strength and ranged combat on Mugenmonkey when I noticed this odd detail. According to the Mugenmonkey's AR Calculator, Gough's Greatbow deals 258 damage at 47 strength and 20 dex without factoring in arrows. However, when you put in 27 strength and 40 dex, it yields 286 damage,even though the weapon scales at B with strength and C with dexterity
When I put these stats into the actual Mugenmonkey Character Planner with Gough's arrows equipped, 47 strength with 20 dex deals 471 damage while 27 strength and 40 dex deals 523 damage. From reading some other posts before, it would seem that Mugenmonkey has been wrong before (ex. factoring in arrow damage twice). However, even more odd is that a 47/20 composite bow with large arrows deals 385 damage while a 27/40 deals 438, even though it scales both dex and strength at equally at C (via Mugenmonkey character planner).
Do bows have an innately higher Dex scaling that isn't shown, or is the Mugenmonkey planner just completely wrong?