Defense/Hit Chance Increase

[Acid Rain]

Question - Anyone know if defense/hit chance increases work in 5 point increments?

I know lower mana cost does, meaning a player gets the same benefits with 15 lmc as 19 lmc, 30lmc as 34 lmc, etc,... however I'm uncertain if hci/dci works in the same fashion.

I'm making a new dexer suit and this info would be extremely useful. Thanks in advance if anyone can clarify.

 

[Acid Rain]

No one? Really? Wow...

Didn't ask in UHALL because it seems there's more important stuff going on (e.g. shard crashes, possible duping, reverts, items being randomly unlock and kicked outside homes) but I really expected someone would know.

 

[Basara]

Well, for one thing, your assumption about LMC is wrong. I can see that in 8th circle spells (which cost 50 mana normally), where each 2% LRC reduces the mana cost by 1.

Given that, your question about HCI/DCI is probably similarly flawed.

 

[Acid Rain]

Thanks for the response and clarification. This has answered my question and is appreciated, even if I have to rebuild the suit since the revert. This does validate usage of hci/dci at increments other then 5%.

My assumption on lmc was tested with more common lower level spells used mostly in pvp, not higher level 8th circle spells. Apparently the testing methods were flawed, it happens. However, given your statement I would suggest that my incorrect assumption would hold mostly true, as 2%lmc reducing 1 point mana for a 50point spell would be almost(if not) inconsequential at lower level spells. The results of lmc would only be noticeable(in lower level spells) if above a threshold which when tested appeared to be at or near the 5% barrier.

 

[Basara]

It's one of those situations where rounding causes the data to appear different from the expected plot.

If you were consistently fighting people with a uniform level of HCI/DCI (quite likely), you could probably find the math for the calculations and see where the break points for the rounding would be. But even as a Math teaching major (that had to drop out from health issues), I would find the math too much a hassle unless someone has a good net calculator that rounds the numbers exactly like the server does.

Remember to also factor in the effects of HLD and HLA as a separate calculation, as you might end up where the differences are appreciable with or without it being in effect (on you, or on the target if your gear has them)

So, it's theoretically possible to run the numbers for your situation to see if you can shave a point off HCI or DCI with no appreciable effect. But, I'll leave that headache up to you.

 

[Acid Rain]

I don't PvP anymore. I haven't in well over a year. I refuse to play with what I consider cheaters so my UO gaming is exclusively PvM now. When I get the itch for PvP I log on the Xbox360 or PS3, at least when I encounter undesirables(cheaters) on consoles I can leave the server/room and join another.

That said, my original testing of LMC was done years ago when I did PvP. HLA defeats the purpose of a bushido dexer that spams counter attack for extra damage. I have already crunched numbers for HLD and am well inside the green zone. HCI has been calculated taking into consideration HLD also. The suit I was (am building - thanks revert) building is for a PvM dexer and I had the choice on jewelry for an extra few points of stats or 3-4%DCI. If DCI worked in 5% increments, a theory you have almost certainly discredited, then the DCI would be wasted.

One good thing about the revert is that I was able to test the suit against Bosses with the stat bonus instead of DCI and found it worked better then expected. Too much DCI defeats the purpose of counter attack. When I was running with higher DCI often my icon would highlight and stay that way until the spell naturally wore off, never having actually had the chance to trigger (I have parry). I believe I have found that "sweet spot" where the spell is triggered everytime yet not immediately upon casting(meaning I'm parrying more but not enough to nullify the spell).

Ok, so I caught myself rambling... sorry. Again, thank you Sir for the reply and the information which was most helpful.