&#×%$& ing garbage mobile version of the forums ate my painstakingly written reply. God I hate mobile.
Anyway. Reply 2.0
So I found the vid. Apparently my adblocker browser wasn't letting the embedded vid display. My first impression is that it all seems legit, within the constraints of the shooting range.
Correct me if I get anything wrong here:
- W&H 2pc had a high hit of 543k at 5 stacks of strained.
- Fox's had a high of 555k also at 5 sacks of strained.
- Sawyers at full stacks had over 600k high.
What I noticed was that the invulnerable target did not have armor to let the 2pc W&H take advantage of it's brand bonus. Meaning it likely would have performed better against an armored target.
Also, do we know if the shooting range targets count as out of cover?
Anyway, as far as I can tell it seems to me that in terms of potential damage, Sawyers is the clear winner here. However, due to RNG and the rate of crit, I think that the point about long-term absolute damage output needing a much larger sample size to correctly compare is valid as well.
Sawyers won't have as much crit as either of the other two, and in the field you won't always be able to maintain full stacks. Then again, W&H won't always be against armored targets, and Fox's wont always hit targets OOC.
So I wonder all of this will wash out over the long term.
I'll try to get some good footage of various tests myself. I don't have the exact same gear as you, but I should be able to come close.