The math would indicate that devouring is in fact better for single target than SoT.

All of these stem from the knowing how to sum an infinite amount of values.

The no-rune hungering arrow has 115%wd with 35% chance to pierce.

Expected %wd is then the chance for damage to occur, multiplied by the damage that would be caused if it did occur. The first shot is guaranteed (115%), the second hit of damage from that same shot only occurs if you successfully roll on that 35%... (115 * .35). The third piece of damage from that same single shot is (115 * .35 * .35), and this goes on.

---> ∑(115 *.35^n), from n=0 to infinite. 115 is constant, pull it out.

---> 115 * ∑(.35^n), from n=0 to infinite.

This will give us the expected %weapon damage of no-rune hungering arrow. We can look at crit, cd, attacks per sec, and actual weapon damage rolls separately.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Expected damage: %wd only

Puncturing arrow: 115%, 50% chance to pierce

115 * ∑(.5^n), from n=0 to infinite.

pretty easy to calc ---> 230% weapon dmg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cinder arrow: 115% + 35%, 35% chance to pierce & hit again, 150% per hit, NOT ALL UPFRONT, I assume full burning dmg is done each time.

150 * ∑(.35^n), from n=0 to infinite.

another easy calculation ---> 230.8% weapon dmg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shatter_Shot: 115%, 35%p, splits into 3 on successful pierce.

Single target: Only one of the three hits if only one target. That is, acts like no-rune hungering arrow. --> 176.9

Full efficiency ---> limited by number of mobs, etc. Can go into more detail if you want.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Devouring Arrow: Each pierce does an addition 70% dmg.

Two ways of thinking of this: 1) 115% + 70%PerPierce

2) 115 x 1.7 per pierce

1) 115 x ∑[.35^n x (1+.7n)] from n=0 to inf. ----> 243.6%

2) ∑[(115+70n) x .35^n] ------> 234.9%

I find that (1) is more likely to be the mechanic than (2)... I dunno.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Spray of Teeth: 115%, 35%p, crits cause 50%wd in area.

Single Target: ∑([115+(50*CritChance)] x .35^n), n=0 to inf //50 is the 50%wd from rune

10% CC ----> 184.6%

20% CC ----> 192.3%

25% CC ----> 196.2%

33% CC ----> 202.3%

40% CC ----> 207.7%

50% CC ----> 215.4%

100% CC ----> 253.8%

(note - CritChance = CC = is decimal version. 50% crit = 0.5)

Multi-Target: +50% WD per additional target in radius.

Edited by Axlor#1961 on 6/22/2012 9:25 PM PDT