Dual wield costs 2AP per attack, while 1h costs 1AP. In the end you will swing your weapon(s) an equal number of times. I'll break down the benefits of both as I understand them. Please let me know if I'm missing anything.
1h pros:
1. Every point in 1h offers +4% DMG and +2% accuracy. Dual wield offers +3% DMG and +1% crit chance. The damage increase is higher for 1h and accuracy is nice. Dual wield offers a lower DMG bonus and provides +1% crit chance. It may be my personal preference, but the additional +1%DMG and +2% accuracy seems better than +1% crit chance. This is especially true for rogues (backstab) and fighters (rage) because they can often get auto crits.
2. Having one weapon means you get to swing your primary weapon, which should be the strongest, four times. Dual wield will give you two swings for your primary weapon and two for your secondary, which is likely weaker. The benefit of 1h could be substantial if your secondary is far weaker than your primary.
3. If you are left with only 1AP in a turn you can still attack with a 1h weapon.
Dual wield:
1. Having a second weapon equipped gives you additional passive bonuses from magic items.
2. If you are trying to maximize crit chance it could give you a minor boost.
3. I may be mistaken with this pro, so correct me if I'm wrong. Martial abilities cost the same amount of AP regardless of 1h, 2h, or dual wield. The abilities damage is linked to the damage of your weapon. Does ability damage take in to account both weapons when dual wielding? If so this may be a huge benefit for dual wield over 1h.
4. Another one I haven't tested is opportunity attacks. Do you get both attacks with dual wield?
From my understanding, 1h weapons are better at standard attacks and dual wield is better at opportunity and martial abilities.
My goal is to find the best damage output for a rogue. I'm leaning to 1h because I won't need the crit chance as often, won't take opportunity attack, and have more utility abilities for positioning than damaging abilities.
