Adding new columns always means diluting the database and therefore lowering its clarity. After all, everyone prefers small legible tables to lengthy confluent ones - not only is it easier on the eyes, it is simpler to track the particular data the user is interested in at the moment. Any added data would really have to be justified by its value for such a dilution to take place and I don't think that can be said about AvD/attack. As you said, it would only be useful in some specific cases, and in those it can be easily deduced by just looking at the min damage and max damage. There is another problem with adding any new columns. At the moment, the already existing ones take pretty much the whole width of a screen (1074x768 resolution). Adding any additional columns would require scrolling back and forth to read the data and check with which weapons is it even connected = missing the point of a user friendly database. Replacing already existing columns with new ones would be a better move transparency-wise, but - just like with dilution - that would require the new info to really be worth it. The usability of AvD/turn would at best be about the same as that of the already present AvD/AP. AvD/AP may not be the a perfect determinant of weapon damaging value when (AP/turn)/(AP/attack) is not an integer, but neither would be AvD/turn when we remember that there is hardly a turn when we don't do anything else (cast spells, use items, move) but attack. No point in having two coefficients organising the weapons +/- in the same order, especially when we keep the dilution and width problems in our minds.