It's not silly at all. The real world value of hit is not 3.27 DPS so long as you can reasonably hit cap yourself (And anyone with ulduar gear can reasonably hitcap themselves).

Theres a few values you can semi reasonably give to hit:

1] The lost value you'd get from replacing 19s with 16 hit (1.55/16*19=1.84
2] The lost value you'd get from replacing reckless monarch topaz with veiled monarch topaz (1.52/8*8=1.52)
3] A value that if used across evaluation of all gear will put you roughly where you need to be in terms of total hit rating.

Anything beyond that is never going to yield realistic results. You might disagree with it, but comparing poorly itemised gear with BiS gear isn't going to convince me.

You don't calculate the value of gems in terms of DPS, because that's for the most part pointless. If you're not hit capped, you get for the hit cap. If you're gemmed for the hitcap, than the value of hit rating on gear equals the spellpower you'd gain from replacing hit gems with spellpower gems. As such, the value of hit rating on gear that replaces gemmed hit rating equals the amount of hit rating devided by 16 multiplied by 19.

There is never a point where you would not gem to the hit cap if you're not already capped, so it's pointless to compare the value of a hit rating gem with a spellpower gem in that scenario. The only scenario where the value of hit rating should be calculated as 3.27 is in a situation where you can't reach the hit cap- which is really irrelevant to the discussion.

When it comes to asking yourself "how much DPS will this item give me?" you should indeed look at exact values like the ones you're suggesting. Perhaps that's where the disconnect comes from. I don't mean to say that the stat gives only 1 DPS at all.

I'm saying that when it comes to assigning a value (and not a direct DPS value but a value in general), then you should value hit rating roughly as the equivilant of 1 DPS. Not because it will give 1 DPS, but because when you value it at 1 DPS you'll find yourself with roughly the right amount of hit rating (IE: Not too much, not too little). If you value it higher, you'll find yourself way past the drop off point of it having any value at all.

Again, I'm not saying 1 hit = 1 DPS, it's either 0 or 3.27-- but because it can be both those values you should give it the value that will last upto but not past the cap. Not because that's the only DPS the stat will give you, but because stacking it past that point grants you nothing.

You're clearly undervaluing the +hit trinkets by not using the correct calculations. You are assuming the trinkets will take you over the hit cap, which would not be the case as you can change out a lot of hit gear in other slots for higher DPS gear, both items and/or gems.

Ofc hit gems are worth more as there are no other gem option giving the same DPS, as I showed above. But it is highly relevant for items like trinkets etc, as in some situations you might not go for hit cap if your only other option gives a higher DPS. Example:

Let's say you have gear/gems and spec and end up 37 below hit cap, not including shoulders. Now you've got two shoulders to chose from:

[Valorous Plagueheart Shoulderpads] and [Mantle of the Corrupted]

Mantle of the Corrupted would bring you to hit cap, the T8 would still leave you 37 short of hit cap. For a Destro spec warlock, the T8 shoulders gives 399 DPS, while the Mantle of the Corrupted gives only 372 DPS, including the 37 hit times 3.27. So in this case you get higher DPS taking the non-hit shoulders and stay 37 below hit cap, than reaching hit cap with inferior shoulders.

Don't stare yourself blind at hit ratings, you need to evaluate each item by the stats it has. And the only correct way to do this is to use the scaling values found in the first post. With normal gear selections from raiding you end up with a hit cap one way or another, the hit trinkets are superior to reaching hit cap and let you use non-hit gear/gems in many other slots. Your table confuses people as it shows incorrect values for the hit trinkets.

I'll try one last simple example and stop after that. Let's say you've got 5 gems slots where you are free to use red or yellow gems without any socket bonus changes. Let's use [Dying Curse] (71 hit, 286 pts in your table) vs [Eye of the Broodmother] (0 hit, 281 pts in your table). Hit trinket vs no-hit trinket. Changing 5 gems will make up for that hit loss, to sum it up using your own table:

Dying Curse + 5x+19 sp gems = 71 hit and 139 sp + 5x19 sp = 234 sp.
Broodmother + 4x+16 hit gems + 1x+9 sp/+8 hit gem = 72 hit and 125 sp + 1x9 sp = 134 sp and 87 crit.

Now, which of these two looks better to you? +1 hit and +87 crit or +100 sp? You table puts the two alternatives at 286 vs 281 rating, indicating they are about as good. But if you add it up correctly, the Dying Curse is clearly superior.

If you instead use the first page scale numbers (again destro spec):

Dying Curse: 71 x 3.27 + 234 x 1.55 = 594 DPS
Broodmother: 72 x 3.27 + 134 x 1.55 + 87 x 1.01 = 531 DPS

Which seems more in line with what you get in a raid.

You're still missing the point, but you're getting there. Let's compare the Dying Curse vs Eye of the Broodmother on a pure DPS left, that is:
Dying Curse 71*3.27 + 139*1.55 = 447.62
Eye of the Broodmother 125*1.55 + 87*1.01 = 281.62

Difference: 166 DPS.

And yet, in the example you posted above (where the hit was mirrored on each side) the difference is only 63 DPS.
Why is this? Because just because it's so valueable before the cap, doesn't mean you should assume this value when you can reasonably and easily surpass the cap.

In the "replace hit from item with hit from gems", you do a quite non ideal stat conversion (getting hit from items is far preferable to getting it from gems), this conversion puts the value of hit rating at hit / 16 * 19 * sp modifier = DPS value. This is not because this is the actual value, but because if you're ditching the hit rating from that item, you can always get it back through gems losing you DPS at that ratio.

So, lets compare it that way:
(71/16*19*1.55)+139*1.55=346.13 DPS Dying Curse
125*1.55 + 87*1.01=281.62 Eye of the Broodmother

Difference: 64.51 DPS

As I said before, this is the highest value you should ever attribute to hit rating on an item (the gem conversion value), this is pretty much the same as what you came out with earlier (63 dps)- the reason there's still a minor difference is because in your comparison the Broodmother had +1 hit and an 8hit/9sp gem was used, which is not a straight conversion from 16/19.

I rate hit rating even lower than this conversion value (which is, again, the upper most value you should ever connect to hit), the reason I value it even lower is because as an alternative to replacing hit rating on gear with hit rating on gems, there's the option of replacing hit rating on gear with hit rating on gear. While that might sound pointless, that's more or less the point- there is so much hit available that you should never have to gem for it. In fact, there's so much hit available that its almost difficult to not have too much. Solution? Give hit a lower virtual value in terms of it's value on gear.

Again, this is not because it doesn't give more DPS- it's because it will only give you DPS until the cap, and using the real world value is not realistic. Perhaps I should expand the table with other DPS values based on gem conversions or the like.

Yeah, but the only way his voodoo math works is by not using the correct value of +hit rating. I just have to go over this again, becuse now he's made the following mistake:

In the trinket/gem comparison, he now wants to give lower +hit value to the +hit gems also! Now he's set 1 point per hit point on the hit gems, or else his math doesn't add up. If you give hit gems 1 point, it means 16 DPS per hit gem, vs 1.55x19 on spell power gems, which is a lot more.

He's taken a whole stat from itemization and given it an incorrect 1.00 value across the board, on all items, gems and trinkets. Sure, you can calculate as much as you like with that. If your gear always have exactly hit cap of hit points, it doesn't matter how many points you give the hit rating, because you've decided hit cap is always best and therefore you can give it 0, 1, 3.27 or 999 points, it won't matter because only the other stats will decide what gear you chose.

But you simply cannot do this!

Let's say we are 71 from hit cap. How much more DPS do I get using Dying Curse vs Broodmother? Let's also add Scale of Fates, see below.

Dying Curse: 429 DPS (lootrank proc average slightly lower than yours)
Broodmother: 281 DPS
Scale of Fates: 303 DPS

You can run Simulcraft a thousand times. You can stand at the test dummy for a week. These are the exact number you will get everytime you measure (using T8 gear class and destro spec).

Again, he is constantly assuming hit cap and then tries to give non-correct values to +hit for some voodoo comparison of items. This is wrong. You must use correct scaling values, only then will you know *if* you should reach hit cap or not. You must let the items speak for their real values to motivate their usage. This includes usage of trinkets, gems and gear. When you reach hit cap with Dying Curse, you have to know the correct +hit DPS from each item you want to replace with. If you gem your way to hit cap when not using the trinket will NOT give the same result as using 2-4 other items. You cannot assume Dying Curse will always be replaced by the gem equivalents of 16 hit/19 sp, because not all gear combinations are made with that ratio.

Let's setup two tests:

[Leggings of the Wanton Spellcaster] + [Scale of Fates] vs
[Conqueror's Deathbringer Leggings] + [Dying Curse]

Assume we are 71 hit short from hit cap, using correct math:
588 (11 hit not used) + 303 = 891 DPS vs
494 + 429 = 921 DPS

Assume we are 82 hit short from hit cap, using correct math:
624 + 303 = 927 DPS vs
494 + 429 = 921 DPS

In the first case, Dying Curse is the better option, in the second case Scale of Fates is the better option. His table shows Scale of Fates (303 pts) as always being better than Dying Curse (286 pts) because it has an incorrect value of the +hit rating. It tricks people into selecting the wrong gear in some situation (because it has assumptions leading to some voodoo math).

Question: How would you rate [Leggings of the Wanton Spellcaster] vs
[Conqueror's Deathbringer Leggings] (ignoring set bonuses)? With 1.0 per hit, the T8 is always a better choise...

You can only make the correct choice if you know each item/gem correct DPS value, as in the end it's the DPS you want to maximize. You take your item options and add them up and see what gives the highest DPS. With this table, you ignore what other gear/gems you can swap around and you might end up wearing lower DPS gear.

If you still don't understand this, I can only assume you don't understand how to add several items together and then compare different item set options.

I agree with Warlockmotif here.

For example, if you compare other gear, you take into consideration wheter you need the hit or not.

The solution: make an extra list where you value the hit at full value. Then people can make their own decision based on wheter they can use the hit on the trinket or not.

The true value of a trinket with hit is not automatically that value x 3.27, that is exactly what warlockmotif is trying to say. +hit is always overvalued on rankings because it is the best/cheapest stat until hitcap. However, why would hit capping yourself through a trinket be superior to hitcapping yourself through hit on gear. (I would never use +hit gems personally)

I believe the point Kilrog is trying to make is that, because the value of hit is never 1, but either 3.27 or 0 (for destro, mind you), it is wrong to make a uniform ranking based on an 'average' of 1. In fact, because of the 'special' property of +hit, it might be best to make 2 lists for the two values of +hit.

another small pet peeve: I would not use the term 'it is X DPS', because it would never translate into that exact value of dps for everyone.

How?

Hit is overvalued because it is the best stat? Say again?

Hit is not overvalued until you reach hit cap, it *is* that good until hit cap, it is worth exactly 3.27 DPS per point vs only 1.55 per point for spell power. It *is* worth more than twice as much as spell power until hit cap.

That depends on the other stats of the items. Here you must also give each stat its correct value to evaluate correctly.

Exactly, either it's worth 3.27 per hit point, or nothing if you're above hit. No voodoo math or approximizations etc. If part of an item brings you over hit cap, you don't count those hit points, the "working" ones are still worth 3.27 DPS each.

But hit is not the only stat with this characteristic. Haste works the same, given enough haste you will hit the GCD for all your spells and further haste points are worthless. Crit will also hit a roof once you have 100% crit, then further crit points gives you no extra DPS. True, no gear allows for this, but the methods are exactly the same. In fact, the number 3.27 is only valid with a unique set of talents and gear. Once you start changing gear and/or talents, the cooefficients will also change.

Given a specific gear set, talent set, fight (like the easy to understand standing still 5 minutes) and lag, it does give exactly X DPS on average. This is what Simulcraft is for.

I use lootrank with the numbers from the Simulcraft thread to select gear. Here are the links I most frequently use:

Affliction incl hit
Affliction without hit

Destro incl hit
Destro without hit

Kilroggmama, you're still missing the point. But to give it a very last try at explaining it- I won't try to make you understand the value I attribute to it, but instead the gem conversion value.

Lets say we have a player specced 0/13/58, Misery is up on the target, and our player has 297 Hit rating (This is taken to be exactly 71 hit rating below the hit cap). He has 1 free trinket slot- and gear with an amount of sockets normal for Ulduar gear.

He has 2 options for trinkets:
1] Dying Curse.
2] Illustration of the Dragon Soul

Now lets evaluate the value of each trinket according to
1] 3.27 DPS per hit
2] Gem conversion DPS per Hit (1.55/16*19=1.84 DPS)

Illustration of the Dragon Soul:
200 * 1.55 = 310 DPS

Dying Curse:
(71 * 3.27) + (139 * 1.55) = 447.63
(71 * 1.84) + (139 * 1.55) = 346.09

According to these models the difference in DPS between these 2 trinkets is:
[Method 1] 137.63 DPS
[Method 2] 36.09 DPS

Now let's see what happens in the real world:
[Option 1] He uses Illustration of the Dragon Soul, takes 4 16 hit gems and 1 gem with 8 hit 9 spellpower. Granting him 72 Hit, and 209 Spellpower.
(71 * 3.27) + (209 * 1.55) = 556.12 DPS

[Option 2] He uses Dying curse, and takes 5 19 spellpower gems. Granting him 71 hit, and 239 Spellpower.
(71 * 3.27) + (234 * 1.55) = 594.87 DPS

Real world difference: 38.75 DPS. The difference exists because we're 1 hit rating high on the gemmed part, but that really doesn't change much. The point is that the benefit you got from using the dying curse was the benefit illustrated by method 2.

"But you gemmed for hit!", ofcourse I did. I'm not using this value for hit to tell me how much DPS I will get, I'm using these numbers to figure out how much benefit one item will give me over another item in the real world. In the real world I would gem for hit if I didnt reach it through gear.

If there's gear to be swapped out to get exactly 14% hit, what would be the better choice for trinkets, Living flame, elemental focus stone or dying curse for deep destro? You are all discussing dying curse, but in the PvE Raiding compedium 3.1 thread, its saying living flame is the way to go, then elemental focus stone.

As being discussed in the previous posts, it depends on how much you value hit. If hit is given its actual, inflated DPS value, the value of hit becomes massive, causing all items with hit to pass all items without hit. If hit is brought down to the DPS value of crit or haste, which is used simply to ignore hit, treating it as if it were itemized as crit or haste, it creates a more realistic value for the trinket. If you were to use the actual value of hit, Elemental Focus Stone would be the best, followed by Living Flame then Dying Curse. But if you were to use more realistic modeling as I explained, Dying Curse is the best by a clear margin, followed by Elemental Focus Stone then Living Flame.

You can. I've written an app to do so, and at least one other person here has also. The trick to preventing the number of combinations being inexhaustibly huge is to prune gear & gear combinations efficiently. For example, every piece of gear can be broken down into two attributes: dps and hit. You calculate dps from the stat weights, and then remove any which have lower hit *and* lower dps than any other piece of gear for the same slot, since they will always be inferior. I won't go into detail on the rest of the algorithm, but you get the idea.

Ultimately, for BiS gear lists you can never combine hit and dps perfectly into a single value. The best you can do is to say that all gear has a dps value ranging between a minimum (calculated where hit= 0 dps) and a maximum (where hit=3.27 dps, or whatever value you need).

Now from there you can either produce two lists for the two extremes, or you can take a ranked list from somewhere in between, but in either case you should include the ranges on the lists because otherwise they can be very misleading if taken at face value.