I currently have:

1411 AP
236 Hit (14.97%)
132 Crit (27.71%)
31/25/5

My question here is, should I drop hit for AP/Crit? How much hit is optimum? Am I stacking too much hit and gimping my AP?


Armory Link


Another concern that i have is,

I'm always behind this rogue by 2.5%-4%, for Magtheridon. He has around 1565AP, 151 Hit and 28.30% Crit.
His gear is pretty much better than mine, but specced as 15/41/5.
I would like to know how would my damage output differ if i respecced into combat, keeping my current AP and hit, in comparison to this other rogue?
(Point: The more hit the merrier?)

If only there were a huge thread to discuss rogue builds and stat distribution.

Combat Potency is huge, for one. 15/41/5 is the generally accepted best damage output for daggers, with 41/20 close behind (Blade Flurry in multi target fights and poison immune mobs are usually the reason 41/20 comes up short.)

Also, rogue.bleedo.net and that thread that was linked by moogle. :]

You still have a long way to go.

The general consensus is with your talent build you need 308.

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...23876&sid=1#14

Yes, you would do more damage as combat. You would also probably do more damage as Mutilate (41/20/0). Off the top of my head I would say that your hit/crit/AP numbers are in the same ballpark as most rogues I see, although your agi is a bit on the low side However, there is no "optimum" amount of hit. Hit provides a damage increase, as does AP, crit, and agi. The question is not "how much hit am I going for" but "how much of other stats do I lose to get hit in this slot, and is the tradeoff worth it".

Also, there's a perfectly good spreadsheet devoted to answering these questions at Rogue DPS Spreadsheet

Thanks for all the replies.


I have tried the spreadsheet, with this build LINK (15/41/5) and replaced all my +hit gems with agi or AP gems.


I found that I get a slight increase in theoretical dps, about 0.2~0.4 dps per gem replaced.
Note: Gems replaced were of same quality, e.g. 8hit for 16AP (8aep for 8aep)

However, I know I cannot possibly miss out totally for hit, so, how much hit theoretically is the bare minimum?

The "Bare Minimum" +hit is governed by your +crit. With Glancing blows which can't crit, you'll need more +hit to remove the crit cap (since crit eats into your normal (non glancing) attacks.

I highly doubt any rogue right now is crit capped. With 40% glancing, 5.6% dodge, 24.4 miss, you have the rest 30% for crit *without any hit at all*. As long you're not an idiot and attack from the front, parry and block won't come into effect (since both of them can't be crits). If you are attacking from the front, your crit cap is effectively reduced by a bit over 10%. Therefore, unless you have 30% crit with absolutely no hit at all, you won't be crit capped. I highly doubt there is a rogue out there with more than 30% crit and no hit at all, considering to reach more than 30% crit with current gear, one would probably need dagger spec/fist spec, which means as long they have a brain they'll have precision, which effectively raises his or her crit cap to 35% (roughly).

Generally, one crit is always better than one hit, as for white damage, the benefits of a crit and a hit are about the same. But crit affects yellow damage, while hit doesn't (well, doesn't after the base hit needed to not miss a single yellow attack). Blizzard also values it this way, as both crit and hit gems give 8 rating, but it takes more crit rating to gain a crit. With kings, 8agil gems are the best as they scale. Obviously, a seal fate or mutilate build will benefit more from crit and a potency build will benefit more from hit, so keep that in mind.

Got to be careful with that.
1% to crit is more damage than 1% to hit
But, 1 hit rating is often more damage than 1 crit rating.

Crit rating is 22 for 1%, hit is only 15.

Given Blizz have itemised gems for equal amounts of both at the same costing, it seems the intent was to make 1 rating equivelent between them. Hasn't worked for me, hit is nearly twice as good as crit rating point for point.


Edit: Bah. Which on second reading is what you were getting at in the last paragraph. Just shows you got to be real careful with this ratings nonsense...