Ssyvan your problem or at least one of them is that you have a belief and instead of being impartial you are trying to force a method to make it true.
Your other problem is that you don't understand what DPR is for. The formula simply measures damage potential vs opponents with AC Y. Due to some creatures having a higher or lower than normal AC or DR or concealment, or some other defense some monsters will not match up. The goal is NOT to say that "every monster of CR X will take _____ damage assuming average rolls."
The formula does exactly what it is intended to do. Once you are in the game you have to adjust things such as TWF'ing, power attacking, get weapon blanches, and so on based on the situation.
It is basically damage in a vacumn, and it is good enough to give you a rough idea of how well you can expect do with damage. It is not a tool to say that you can expect this much damage "all the time".
You are looking for more than DPR can give and complaining about it.
Yes if I want to be really accurate I can do a full round attack + a standard attack. I am also look at flanking vs not flanking, and how much DPR changes when DR 5(replace with another number as needed) is in play. These extra factors give more information, if I(really anyone) cares for it, but for those of use who just want a general number to work with DPR works well.
We also dont run simulations because while they should, they may not put out numbers that are accurate. So you just go with the average to avoid "good dice or bad dice" days, which can make something seem better or worse than it really is.
You also tried to go after the AC we used as if the list was wrong. You must be new around here. Of course someone would have at least done a cursory check. It is not like someone came up with this and everyone else fell in line and said "well he must be right".
If you want to be taken seriously stop using edge cases. If you present an outlandish case it won't be taken seriously--->The reason is because anyone can present some ridiculous corner case to make their position look good, so they really have no merit. Yeah, you claimed to have linked to a thread, but I see nothing reasonable that you contributed. Maybe you should link to the specific post.
1st level characters really? That is your base? At first level you can one shot creatures. At higher levels you can not(normally). The game changes. Saying the game is simpler at first level does not mean that 1st level is the most accurate way to measure the game by any reasonable standard. That is not even logical. At first level it is easier to hit and kill casters than martials in most games. Are you going to say that standard also applies across 20 levels?
wraithstrike, I think you posted this in the wrong thread