a nukemage?

[Hullukko]

1. Do I hit? Up to 85-86% chance of hitting a target or your hit %, whichever is lower.
2. Does the target dodge? It depends on the targets dodge.

So the real chance of hitting is your hit % OR hit cap (whichever is lower) - enemy dodge.

So sure of yourself, are you?
The physiologic's guide to advanced mechanics is inconclusive in this matter. He did not try out different enemy dodges nor did he try lower values of hit%. Thus where, when and if the cap takes place was left undetermined. There are many experienced players here suggesting that the hit percentage might play a role in the enemy dodge roll in a sense that a player would benefit froma hit% higher than 85. In a sense that even if the max obtainable successful hit rate would be 85%, some people are saying that against enemies with higher dodge it might be beneficial to have a hit percentage higher than that.

What physiologic did was prove that one cannot hit above a certain rate. That is not the same as a player should not have a higher hit percentage than that rate.
Based on those tests one cannot say that a hit percentage above 85% would be useless. He proved that one cannot hit with a higher success rate than that, but he used very high values of hit% there leaving the question of how would have a hit% of 85 performed there.

The point being that, those results do not show that what is at play is a cap, it may also be a minimum miss-rate of 15%. If the latter is the case and hit percentage plays a role in enemy dodge roll then there is a difference between successfull hits between having hit% at 85 or at, say, 95. Now, that is hypothetical, I don't know which is it. All I'm saying that in the absence of other data the results are inconclusive in this matter.

My personal hunch on the matter is that I hit better with a gear set-up where my hit% is 100ish than what I do with a 85, but I cant say for sure. This is something I've been meaning to determine by experiments but I haven't gotten around to do that. Just wait and see.

For spell damage, it's been established that 1 handed weapons give a higher percentage of their damage to skill damage 95 - 100% versus 2h weapons which are usually in the 70s.

Oh, come on. I was referring to the one handed gemstone sword and one handed gemstone axe. The axe has higher base damage, but lower skill damage. That is something I have not seen explained yet. The difference between them, apart from being an axe and a sword, is in the hit rate. It's as if a higher the hit rate carries a slight negative effect on spell damage. This is an example that there's more to it than just handedness.

I have not seen a thread where the "base damage -> spell damage" relation is fully explained. If there is one, please give a pointer.