2% crit damage is almost a good idea, but the balancing is off

I actually like the idea of giving Dwarves increased critical strike damage instead of just copying the Human crit racial. It gives both races something unique, and theoretically allows one racial to perform better early on while the other scales with gear.

The problem is that **2% crit chance and 2% crit damage aren't remotely equivalent in terms of DPS.**

Assuming a 5% base crit chance and 200% critical strike damage, here's how the two racials compare at different gear levels, with the Dwarf and Human starting at 1,000 DPS, with 0% crit.

|Crit from gear|Human (+2% Crit)|Dwarf (+2% Crit Dmg)|Human advantage| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |0%|1,070.00|1,051.00|\+1.81%| |10%|1,170.00|1,153.00|\+1.47%| |25%|1320.00|1306.00|\+1.07%| |40%|1,470.00|1459.00|\+0.75%|


**My suggestion is simple: reduce Human to 1% crit chance and increase Dwarf to 3% crit damage.**

Here's what that looks like:

|Crit from gear|Human (+1% Crit)|Dwarf (+3% Crit Dmg)|Advantage| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |0%|1,060.00|1,051.50|Human +0.81%| |10%|1,160.00|1,154.50|Human +0.48%| |25%|1,310.00|1,309.00|Human +0.08%| |40%|1,460.00|1,463.50|Dwarf +0.24%|


Now there's an actual tradeoff. Human is slightly stronger at lower crit levels, Dwarf scales better as gear improves, and the two reach parity at roughly 28.33% total Dwarf crit chance.

Obviously, this is a simplified model that assumes all damage can crit and doesn't account for class-specific mechanics or crit-triggered effects. But it illustrates the underlying balance problem pretty clearly.

Racials don't need to be mathematically identical, but one shouldn't be objectively better than another throughout practically the entire gearing process.

I think 1% crit chance versus 3% crit damage gets us considerably closer to the kind of racial balance Forever should be aiming for.