A Quick Dexterity Analysis (in General)

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 11:57 AM EST

Hey all,

I have been meaning to get to this for several weekends now, but just finally did. I wanted to see how many double-hits dexterity (and dexterity alone) can provide.

We all know that dexterity is all about the gap. My tank's dexterity is around 104,000, so just call it 100K. I decided to pick on three characters with single minions, base dexterity, and no ToJs to get in the way: The Germs, Ice Cold Cylo, and Susan Death. I did all of my analysis in ranged, where my compound bow has a plus-to-hit of zero, and my ammo bundle also has plus-to-hit of zero. In other words, double-hits can only be attributed to the dexterity gap.

Here are the results for a dexterity gap north of 100K:

Number of battles: 100
Number of ranged rounds: 300 (all battles lasted at least three rounds)
Number of misses: 0
Number of triple-hits: 0
Number of battles having ZERO double hits: 5
Number of battles having ONE double hit: 19
Number of battles having TWO double hits: 51
Number of battles having THREE double hits: 25
PERCENTAGE OF DOUBLE HITS = 196 doubles/300 rounds = 65.33%

- With this dexterity gap, one will achieve double hits around 2/3rds of the time.
- With this dexterity gap, it looks like one can never miss.
- Regardless of dexterity gap, one will never get a triple-hit from dexterity alone (Jonathan has already confirmed as much in various CB1 and CB2 posts throughout the years).
- The randomness involved will still yield battles where no doubles are registered in ranged. These battles tend to stick out more, but the numbers do not lie: doubles still occur nearly 2/3 of the time.

Speculations (in other words, I am totally guessing here):
1. Even with a large dexterity gap, the odds for that second hit are capped at around 65% (or about 2/3 of the time).
2. One can never miss that first shot if one has a sizable dexterity differential on an opponent.

- To aid in confirming speculation number 1, someone with a much larger dexterity should run the same test as I just did. I plan on being this person myself once my dexterity doubles to around 200K. Some other folks are already close to that.
- To aid with confirming speculation number 2, someone with a much smaller dexterity (maybe in the 20K to 30K range) should try this analysis out. It could very well be that any dexterity gap at all yields a guaranteed first hit, but I have never confirmed that.

So say we all. Good hunting.

Manta March 20 2005 12:17 PM EST

So, if your opponent has base DX (and no ToJ, ToA or EC), there is no point in training DX past 100K.
Does DX work the same in ranged and in melee (namely, the percentage of double hits stays the same), or not?
Finally, to ensure 65% of double hits against base DX, is it necessary to have 100K, or does it suffice a significantly lower DX?
I think you see my point: if one plans to fight against single mages with no ToJ or ToA, DX higher than 100K is a waste of EXP.

QBJohnnywas March 20 2005 12:22 PM EST

This might seem an obvious question - forgive me I've never really looked at DX much. If you train DX on a mage will it cut down the chances of them being triple hit?

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 12:25 PM EST

It is speculative, but a 100K differential does appear to be enough to insure doubles 65% of the time. But, I do not know if that differential is based on a factor or just a gap. I.e., I am not sure 500K dexterity vs. 400K dexterity would yield the same result. It may be based on a percentage increase of the opponent's dexterity. In the tested case, the percentage increase is many, many, many hundred's of a percent (because the opponent has only base dexterity, so that could be why the 65% cap (if it even is a cap) is reached). In the 500K vs 400K case, that would only be a percentage differential of 25%, so I am not sure the results would be the same.

I see no reason melee would be different than ranged, but it is hard to find a consistent target that lasts long enough to take decent data. Feel free to run your own numbers and post here.

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 12:27 PM EST

Johnnywas, yes, dexterity can act as a defensive measure. It will not, however, stop plus-to-hit. But it could help against the second hit delivered because of the dexterity gap alone.

That being said, training dexterity (or Haste) for PURELY defensive purposes is probably not a good idea. On a tank it is smart because the dexterity also helps with offense. Stealing from a mage's specificity, however, is likely ill-advised.

QBJohnnywas March 20 2005 12:29 PM EST

I can assure you I have no intentions of diluting my mage's talents ! IMO a good offense is the best defence! But thanks for the clarification! =)

Manta March 20 2005 12:29 PM EST

Do you think it does work the same way on CB1?

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 12:34 PM EST

Analyzing a much smaller dexterity gap, I fought Gyaxx 20 times.

Gyaxx has a dexterity of 84,768 vs my 103,618, for a straight difference of 18,850. My percentage increase on him for dexterity would only be around 22%.

Results for 20 battles, 60 ranged rounds:
Number of double hits: ZERO
Number of MISSES: 6

So, this differential yielded no double hits whatsoever, and I even missed him several times.

My thought is that the percentage difference in the dexterity gap is driving this. If I had 20K dexterity vs a base dexterity mage, I am betting I would see a fair number of double hits and never miss (can anyone try that out? Just a ten-battle run should be illustrative enough). But since Gyaxx and I are both higher up, and the percentage differential is only 22%, I am not seeing doubles.

Any data will help here -- big dex against slightly smaller dex, big dex against little dex, little dex against no dex... Feel free to post anything you come up with. Just be sure you choose good targets that have no ToJ in the way to screw up the numbers, and also be on the lookout for EC and Haste since these enchantments can change the numbers. The items that would be nice to confirm would be the 65% doubles cap and the fact that percentage differential drives the phenomenon, not the straight additive gap.

[FireBreathing]Chicken March 20 2005 1:01 PM EST

try training a really small EC (enough to take out 20 dex). and attack with a 20 dex minion :)

Manta March 20 2005 1:44 PM EST

Here are my result, in CB1. I fought beeswax 20 times.
My DEX: 311K. beeswax' DEX: 150K.
DEX Difference: 162K. Ratio:2.07
20 battles, 60 ranged rounds, 34 single hits, 26 double hits.
Ratio double/total: 0.43

Manta March 20 2005 1:45 PM EST

Forgot to add (but you can gather it by the data): no misses, and no triple hits.

[FireBreathing]Chicken March 20 2005 1:50 PM EST

so, if CB1=CB2 in dex calculations, the double hit % has to do with proportion, not size of gap.

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 2:38 PM EST

Yes, and I assume CB1 and CB2 still work the same. Great data, thanks! Looks like a 100% increase in dex on your opponent starts yielding some nice doubles, while my 22% on GYaxx yielded zero. Anyone care to find someone they outrank by 50% dexterity? 75K to 50K, or 60K to 40K? I am rather curious as to when the doubles start appearing in force...

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] March 20 2005 2:47 PM EST

I will add Chet, that I do have big DBs, I realize the common perception is it only effects the + of weapons, of which you have none, but perhaps part of the reason for the data results you show against Gyaxx are the DBs factoring in some how? Just thought I would toss it out, since that seems pretty steep decrease from outclassing someone by 100K and by 20K.

Manta March 20 2005 3:14 PM EST

I wish to add that, more important than the number of double hits alone, is the TOTAL number of hits (namely, single hits + 2 X double hits).
Moreover, it seems implausible to me that, at least for low DEX, the ratio alone is important: otherwise, as Chicken has pointed out, a small EC would be far too powerful.

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 4:39 PM EST

Sefton, I am hoping DBs have nothing to do with it. If they do, then my entire perception of the way dexterity and plus-to-hit work is incorrect. Just in case he is reading, Jonathan, Gyaxx's DBs should not have anything to do with my results in the way I carried out the study, should they?

[FireBreathing]Chicken March 20 2005 5:39 PM EST

My theory is that its based on proportions, but capped at about 50-65% double hits.

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 7:54 PM EST

Yes, I am thinking there is a cap regardless, considering 100K vs base is a large differential whether it is additive or multiplicative. Since Jon like fractions, I would guess the cap is 2/3.

AdminJonathan March 20 2005 8:00 PM EST

DB/evasion effect doesn't affect DX chance to hit.

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 9:26 PM EST

Thank you, Jonathan. :P

Sefton, not sure why you were so hard to hit. I would just say that a 20% dexterity differential isn't enough to guarantee anything. *shrug* I will look for a target with about 3/4 my dexterity and see what happens on a 20-battle spread... Don't know of a lot of other single tanks, though. You?

QBsutekh137 March 20 2005 10:28 PM EST

Found one more target, a single tank named Constant, dexterity 66,119.

That's 37,500 less than me, and I represent 1.57 his dexterity.

20 battles, 58 ranged rounds (a couple time I got him in 2), with 11 double hits, no misses, and no triples. So thats a percentage of 11/58, or right about 19% double hits.

In summary, we have:
- ZERO double hits (and even a few misses) when percentage increase in dexterity is around 22%.
- 19% double hits when dexterity percentage increase is 57%
- 43% double hits when dexterity percentage increase is around 100%
- 65% double hits when percentage increase is around infinity *smile* (large vs base).

Looks like dexterity might start scoring doubles when the percentage increase over your opponents is around 40-50 percent. We have yet to verify the 65% cap until someone larger decides to pummel some poor, clumsy mages...
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001Fl1">A Quick Dexterity Analysis</a>