Please clarify Evasion and DB Stacking... (in General)

I have a (82) Evasion on my Mage and +34 DB's so does that mean I have 116 evasion in melee and 116 * 2 in Ranged Round 1, 116 * 5/3 in Ranged Round 2 and 116 * 4/3 in Ranged Round 3?

If so, I am confused because if I have 232 effective Evasion in Ranged Round 1, how can a ToA Tank with a +101 Weapon be hitting me? Even with a +100 pth ToA boost, that is still under my Evasion level.

Any help would be appreciated, and btw the Tank is Constant against my Queen Beee char.

+34 DB's don't give 34 Evasion is all I know.

OK, lots of misconceptions to deal with here.

First off, the multipliers don't start with 2, they start with 3.

Second, the factors for the ranged rounds don't multiply the effect, they multiply the level (I was confused too, don't worry about it *smile*). Like me, my 1.5 million Evasion has an effect of 131. That does NOT translate into 393. It translates into level 4.5 million Evasion, which is is somewhere around an effect of 200. The defensive dexterity, long thought to NOT multiply by the factors, in fact, DOES. So, in round one, I have an effective defensive dexterity of 4.5 million. That's nice, and works well.

Finally, DBs. Think of the + on DBs as being a certain "level" of evasion. For example, DBs at +131 have an Evasion "level" of 1.5 million, as I state above. That is the level that stacks with your learned Evasion, yielding some effect. It can all be mapped out iteratively, it is just tedious. DAWG's DBs that Ranger recently bought, at +192, probably have an evasion level around 4 million or so. So, If i had those boots, I would have an evasion level of 1.5 million plus 4 million = 5.5 million. Effect? I've no idea. Rough exponetial guess would put it around 225. I don't think the evasion level afforded bby the DBs translates into defensive dex, you only get that from the real, learned evasion.

Folks, correct me if I am wrong, I most often am.

there was another thread about this somewhere...

"Folks, correct me if I am wrong, I most often am."

You are? I'll have to look into this

Even worse, wrong in an authoritative, trusted way. *wink*

My tank Constant has a ToA (~1.3M) an ELB (+101) and a Dex of ~2.2M. So, while the evasion/DBs might out-distance my cumulative "+", I probably have enough Dex left to make a hit or two.

indeed. Keep in mind, that although the DB are converted to a level, that level has absolutely no baring on defensive DX, it only works for removing the +. So your Evasion level (which i would guess to be somewhere around 450-500k?) is the only thing providing DX. triple that for the first round of ranged, and he still has a 700-850k DX advantage, which should definitely be enough. That's why, unless you plan to have HUGE Displacement Boots, Elven Boots are your better choice (more defensive DX, you'd probably have a similar effect with a pair of +20 or above EB than you do with the DB, and EB provide much needed AC :)

Someone should put Sutekh's explanation in the wiki.

(I would, but I just stopped by on my way to bed... :)

Well done, Sut ;)

Wiki me! Wiki me! I would do it as well, but I am still not knowing where to put things in there, especially stuff that spans skills, stats, and items all at once. :\ Is there just a generic "Anecdotal Information" portion of the Wiki?

http://www.carnageblender.com/wiki/Skills

Thanks, NS, looks great. I re-edited and took out some of the editorial comments, and say you had already pretty much made it suitably generic. Thanks!

Darn, I missed those two remarks. Ah, well.

And 1 > one is rather humourous =)

Ha ha! You difference reader you! Sometimes my OCD kicks in when revising...that's why I so rarely like to revise. *smile*

I don't understand the comaprison with EBs. If your mage only has a 20 dex and no evasion, how do EBs help? Or are you saying that if the EBs bonus to Evasion and/or dex is greater than the levels added by the DBs, you should go with the EBs?

EBs increase your Evasion, which increases the defensive DX of your minion and lowers their PTH at the same time, whereas DB just increase the amount of PTH you take off.

If you have really high Evasion, EBs will most likely help you more than DB, unless you have some ginormous DBs.

By the way, why is DBs not in the dictionary?

miteke, great question, and Tyriel, already a great answer... Just to keep with my personal example, here is my Evasion:

1,476,000/1,200,000 (131)

That huge boost is from the EBs. Now, if I wore DBs that had + that gave me more than 276K level of evasion, I should switch to those, because they would make my effect be greater. I am not sure what + on the Dbs would be needed to equate to a 276K-level Evasion, or if their NW would be greater than my current EBs. AND, EBs give me a bit of AC. I would venture to say I am at the cross-roads, neding to get a hefty pair of DBs instead of the EBs. Hard to say, without having a direct +/level DB/Evasion calculator. NS, is that what you have? What DBs would give me around 300K Evasion level? Alternately, what effect does 300K in evasion have?

EB tend to be the cheaper option for when you have Evasion. Unless you've got some NW into DB, EB will probably be better for you, especially when you're a tank, you can't be pumping Ranged weapon, Melee Weapon and DB.

You only use DB when you're a tank if you've got some other income support, playing doesn't really cut it.

It gives Mages something to play with though, to put the money that they all seem to have.

I always said that EB > DB if you don't have a lot of money, especially when you have Evasion trained and it is a high level (Sut), helps with Defensive DX and gives probably 30 AC, which is decent for *Mage* Footwear, wouldn't you say?

Sut, you'll have to keep pumping DB slightly or a lot, I don't know, if you want them to stay better than EB. If your evasion keeps growing, the Bonus will get larger, so you have to factor that in.

Tyriel, DBs isn't in the Spell check, because you're saying Displacement Bootss, the S is already on the Abbreviation :) Same goes with all those other items, such as TG not TGs and the like.