Sorry for being a douche, had given plasma that day (make me moody lol) and had a stressful week ahead at work (almost over now). Once I had written out my formulas I was able to tweak them to compare with Xen's results.
The point I had been trying to iterate (badly) was that there needed to be a justification of adhering to a particular formula, based upon the data we had. There are many ways to test the varying hypotheses.
I had originally been propounding the idea of
newhit=(1-buff)*oldhit
however realised that Xen's data implies
newhit=oldhit/(1+buff)
Its implications aren't huge in the scheme of things, however it does significantly vary from Zho's idea. (I will get to PVP later. PVP is known to have different rules, as per Linzey's post)
Reconciling Xen's data in Zho's model:
Xen_new_evade_vsmaff=Xenoldevade_vs_maffs*(1+buff)
(1/1.24)=Xenoldevade*(1.24)
Xen's oldevade vs maffs=(1/1.24^2)=65% (35% hit)
I didn't like this model as I felt it was inconsitent with known maff hit level (mafff being a low level mob, Xen having very high evade)
Comparison of the two models
In Zho's model it's possible an avatar could never be hit by a mobs, essentially making faps and armor useless. From many ubers with these buffs, I doubt the application of this model.
PVP rules
There is a thread somewhere looking at this.
Essentially,
Hit %=100+(Hit+profession-Evader_profession)
With Zho/Elis observations, this rule holds true if we apply a flat benefit to Evader/Dodger/Jammer profession:
Rubio
Unbuffed Hit%=100+62-32.75=129% (observed: 100%)
Buffed hit%=100+62-32.75*1.2=122% (observed: 100%)
Dominax
Unbuffed Hit%=100+29.98-39.55=90% (observed: 93%)
Buffed hit%=100+29.98-47.46*1.2=83% (observed: 85%)
More data will make it clearer. Best test scenario would be a mob that hits you ALMOST all of the time (to eliminate a MA trick wherethe mob hit level plays a role/is extended past 100 such that 100/(1+buff)>100).
Melee Phasms or PVP Hogglo Olds/providers will probably do the trick for a control for ~40Evader