So apparently equips DO matter in pvp.

Funded nowadays mostly aims towards potential. Just saying in the case of 120-180 pvp, her equips really couldnt be a whole lot better. "Godly Funded" doesn't go much further than a perfect weapon, gloves, shoes, belt, and cape. She's not all too far off on any of those. Maybe lacking a maximum of 10-20 atk. For a more concrete example, she pointed out to me that most of her US hits were simply "hit", but when she applied the full challenger set buyable with emblems, she started getting more cools than hits. This makes me assume that pvp attack is a bit more significant. Considering she sacrificed her MoN (arguably the better pendant for PVP assuming you arent rocking a CHTP or Rising Sun) for a challenger pendant which isn't really anything special. Which makes me wonder if it really is % dmg. As for skill we played each others characters and shared strategies, with about the same results in each game. I feel like map circumstances and different classes in the game really decide it more so than anything. Against a load of warriors and mages I can easily win. It's the games full of NL's and other classes that depend on fleeing more so than attacking that she tends to do better thanks to her range and mobility. While "skill" tends to be the key word in every PVP discussion I've encountered, when it comes down to it "circumstance" seems to be far more deciding. Different maps are better for different classes as well. You could argue that you just have to learn to play in a versatile manner, but each class is limited to their own skill set regardless. There are always gonna be different layouts that determine the match outcome far more than the ability of each player. I've noticed most unfunded BaMs I encounter seem to do almost as well as I do. While I don't have perfect equips, im sure to have a 60-70 matk advantage on unfunded BaMs easily.

tl;dr pvp attack seems noticeably more effective than regular attack, but map/opposing characters/class determine game outcome most.