Evasion and Defence...what's the best, what's the difference?

[gogoblender 3,070]

Hey guys

 

Okay, I've been putting a lot of work into my twin dryad builds which are currently in level 74 HC now. One of them is the Trader, and now at level 74 bargaining 226 she can pretty much buy any socketable I need. I have noticed something interesting however. When Zinsho first shodded me with rings in a low level on another toon there was a ring he gave me that said something like "reduces enemies chance to evade -20.3 %) I had thought at high levels the ring would become outdated and could be exchanged with something else. The interesting thing is... I've as yet not found any ring with a percentage that high on Evade and have even noticed that my Trader ( who is crap in battle btw ) Seems to be now missing... a lot. I've tried socketing some very high level Attack rings but...something keeps having me come back to that Evasion ring. So now I'm here asking... How do Evade and Def compare? Is equitable percentages on both the absolute same.... or is one actually a better value for hitting a monster? I'm noticing that actually finding Attack rings is easy...but finding rings that actually reduce a monster's chance to evade...rare.

 

Should this be telling me something?

 

 

gogo

[Erling 3]

well for me I think of evade is your chanse ''to jump away'' from attacks, armor for reducing incoming damage and defense decreases opponents chanse to hit. but I got noooo idea

[Zinsho 0]

Well +attack in theory seems to increase chance to hit (in practice too but very slowly)

 

However +Chance they Cannot Evade coupled with -Evasion Chance (two different but similar mods) are what provide the >100% Chance to hit.

I don't know if enemies have any real evasion chance, or if they only have defense, however perhaps the best way of looking at it is (and this is hypothetical and assuming 0% Evade in their cases)

 

People have noticed that combat reflexes seems to work to the manner of:

(1-Combat Reflexes) * Chance to Hit

 

while evasion seems to be

Chance to Hit * (1-Evasion %)

 

Thus the sum would be:

(1-Combat Reflexes) * (CtH * (1-Evasion))

In practice they should work together, two types of evasion but it's almost as if they roll separately. Further testing will tell.

 

It likely works something akin to this, however instead of chance to hit you'd have to insert Chance to be hit (which is (1-chance to hit)).

[Asuka Sohryu L. 0]

Evasion chance is your chance if not getting hit in the first place.

Defense rating is how much damage you take if you are hit.

[Zinsho 0]

Nope, armor is your resistance.

 

Evasion is one roll to not get hit.

Defense is a second.

 

As to chance to be hit:

 

Reflect

Block

Evade

Defense

 

Block and evade aren't in any particular order though, however reflect comes first and defense last out of that list.

[gogoblender 3,070]

Nope, armor is your resistance.

 

Evasion is one roll to not get hit.

Defense is a second.

 

As to chance to be hit:

 

Reflect

Block

Evade

Defense

 

Block and evade aren't in any particular order though, however reflect comes first and defense last out of that list.

 

 

Nice reference info Zin, I'll add the hierarchy to the wiki. So the game rolls for evade first before Def? Is this a way of saying if we socket with Evade, we can do better than with Attack? Which of the Evasion mods is it that will increase our chance to hit monsters that keep seeming to jump out of the way of our attacks.

 

 

gogo

[Zinsho 0]

I know that's the order for rolling when you're being attacked.

 

However the method that +%Cannot Evade Attacks and -%Enemy Evasion are rolled is still unclear.

As to whether stacking that works better than +Attack rating, I'd say yes.

The easiest way of testing this would be use 3 rings on a character that doesn't have any anti-evade gear/buffs running.

 

Test 1:

+% Attack (The reason for % rather than fixed value is the other 2 are % as well and you want to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges).

 

Test 2:

-% Evasion

 

Test 3:

+% Cannot Evade

 

As much as possible try to get all 3 values as similar as possible. I'm quite certain that the +% Cannot evade will be lowest and that +%Attack might be highest. Try to make sure it is higher than -% Evasion, or at least very close.

 

Now while changing around these three rings, look at your last enemy and what the chance of hit does. I'm fairly certain *read I'd stake my toon on this* that you'll find that +% Attack will have the least effect. +%Cannot evade might have the greatest effect, but it really depends on how much of it you get relative to -%Evasion.

[nokka 0]

I do have one question about the display of the hit chance.

 

My inquisitor has "opponent's chance to evade -17%" and - sometimes even without soul reaver - has had up to 112% hit chance.

Including ONLY attack/defense in the interpretation, that implies that my attack over opponents defense is less than -1 ...definitely not right.

 

I guess then it must have something to do with this -% on the enemy's evade, because +% is always easy to imagine.

 

I said display because I haven't noticed any disturbances in the game due to mathematical impossibility,

but has anybody been able to explain that little anomaly or even noticed it? I just saw it yesterday.

 

Funny thing is, in 2.12 I had at most 100%, so I can only assume it came in a patch after 2.12.

 

Anyway, not grave but noteworthy problem. Food for thought?

 

nat

[Zinsho 0]

Greater than 100% Chance to hit is honestly just for the sake of letting you know the real value. More than 100% really just is 100% but it allows you to see that even if your chance to hit dropped by 20%, it might still be more than 100.

[Llama8 8]

The way the chance to hit was displayed was changed in one of the patches, my TG is now getting ~>200% chance to hit (or was until I removed some -% opponent's evade mods to add more damage).

[nokka 0]

Thanks Zinsho, for the answer.

 

Logical and understandable as it may be to show the 'real' value as being >100%, it makes kinda little sense in a mathematical way. The way I see it, that number should never even get to 100% save by rounding up, chances always being numbers less than 100%.

 

But I guess it makes sense enough to have a kind of 'reassuring display' of the hit chance. (I'd love to hit 20% more often than always)

 

thanks again

 

nat

Edited January 18, 2009 by nokka