When using moves that hit multiple times, how do the powers add up?

Question

Say my Haxorus has Dual Chop and Dragon Claw. Which would hit harder? The 80-power one-hit Dragon Claw, or Dual Chop, which hits twice with 40 power?

Answer 1

It may lead you to believe that 40 power x 2 hits is the same as an 80 power hit move, but it's not.

Let's use some logic here:

Let's say that Dual Chop does around 50 - 70 damage per hit, meaning two hits is around 100 - 140 damage. Now, let's say that Dragon Claw will have a range of 120 - 130. Because Dual Chop hits twice, each move's power is going to vary slightly, as (excluding moves like Dragon Rage and Sonic Boom) no move has set damage. These means, because of the variation, the possible range on damage is either much either or much lower. It has a higher max damage than Dragon, but a low minimum damage. This is all because of how much Dual Chop's per hit damage can differ. In this case, Dragon Claw is going to be doing more consistent high damage, because it's only one attack.

Dual Chop can be useful, especially going against things like substitute or Sturdy users.

Answer 2

Dual chop and dragon claw would do the same amount of damage because multi hit moves power just adds up.

Comments

Ok. Dual Chop would be better in certain situations, as it can break a Sub first hit, and damage the next? :3

Answer 3

it would have the same power.

obviously, since 40+40=80, but since a move doesnt do the exact same amout of damage every time, it varies.
also, each Dual Chop hit is considered a seperate move (meaning they dont do the same amount of damage and one can get a critical hit while the other doesnt.)

Source and~ source.

---

Ok. Dual Chop would be better in certain situations, as it can break a Sub first hit, and damage the next? :3

Yes.

Comments

"since a move doesnt do the exact same amout of damage every time, it varies."

---

My answer was still more accurate, Dragon Claw is going to be doing more damage over time, which is what he asked. Technically yes, I was just saying. I shouldn't have called you outright wrong, sorry, but I'm still more accurate :P