Using a staff vs using a wand or a mace?

So I have never used a staff before, only wands and now maces (also daggers). So I wonder, what would be the advantage of using a staff vs using double maces or double wands or daggers? Can it provide the same amount of damage as dual wands? I wonder because it can have more socket links.

"

Abdiel_Kavash wrote:

- another six-link (or a six link if you are using Kaom's, Shroud, BoR, etc.)
- block chance
- more powerful mods than one-handed weapons (for example +3 gem level which you can't get on one-handers at all)
- unique mods on unique staves

I don't know what those are, but sure, 6-link is what I was going for here. Block chance is also I assume useful. So you would say it's possible to get as much or even more damage from a rare staff compared to two rare wands for a spell-based character?

"

Abdiel_Kavash wrote:

"

FrozenOne wrote:

I don't know what those are, but sure, 6-link is what I was going for here. Block chance is also I assume useful. So you would say it's possible to get as much or even more damage from a rare staff compared to two rare wands for a spell-based character?

That depends on the spell you're using and the rest of your build. There is no single right answer for everybody.

Purely in terms of damage output, in many cases two scepters tend to be better than two wands which tend to be better than a staff which tends to be better than a 1h + shield. In terms of defense the order is reversed.

But again, there are about as many exceptions to this order as there are examples of it.

Hmm, later today I will see if I should keep some staffs then. I have a couple with +2 to gems, but so trying them on on my totem templar yielded horrible results, and my mage doesn't have enough strength to use them anyway, which is what I would use for damage spells. I wonder if any of them are worth anything, but besides that, I don't think the extra 6 link is worth the extreme reduction in damage. Better to wait and get some 6 link armor instead I think...