Then why do you use Marduk's over Teal?
I haven't updated my gear set in over a year+ and I only did it to show a friend how to build an SST setup, so don't rely on it. Also, Marduk Jubbah would give a MACC bonus of 6-12, against Teal Saio's 7-10. Since I gear for worst case scenario (and the bigger bonus), I still wear Marduk.
Let's just agree we have no clue if it's 2CHR-1skill or 1:1.
The problem is, it's Both (I'm also assuming you mean skill=MACC, otherwise your wrong). Tests show that the type of bonus you get is both 1:1 and 2:1 or VERY close. Your target's stats determine WHEN this changes from 1:1 to 2:1. The higher the mob's stats, the more MACC you receive from stats.
Otherwise I'd be all over that Piper Torque, and so would you.
I have/use one.
At any rate, I'm not gonna be the one who tests it since level 85 stuff is so unresistant I'll never have a good mob to spam, other than NM's which are meant to die, are a pain to pop, etc.
You don't need high level mobs to test this. Much of the tests have been done against lower level mobs. As long as you know the enemy's base stats you can measure stat's effects of MACC.
Stuff about MACC and PACC
First: MACC works nothing like PACC. They are calculated completely differently, so you cannot assume the same. You really need to read up on how MACC is calculated.
Second: You underestimate how much Etudes and their effect on MACC works on mobs you are under-geared for. If you have a high resist rate, your Etudes will give you a 24 MACC bonus without a proper instrument. This is a little less than what a HQ staff would give you under the same conditions.
Third: Your understanding of how MACC is used to determine Magic Hit Rate (and by extension, how PACC determines Hit Rate) is flawed. Infact, what you said makes no sense. When we talk about percentages, we are talking about Magic/Physical Hit Rates. 1 MACC could increase Magic Hit Rate by 5%, or it could increase it by 50% - This all depends on the target's natural Magic Evasion stat. MACC and Magic Hit Rate are NOT the same thing.
leads me to believe there is a tier on CHR
There is, I told you that. But the tier isn't 120 CHR, it's dStat.
comparable CHR and M.acc., I'd go for the straight M.Acc.
It depends on your definition of comparable. Due to your misunderstanding, I can see why you'd do MACC. However, The real answer is "Whatever is better". As I said before, there is never a point where CHR is useless. For example, if you have a piece of gear that grants +10 MACC and one that grants +12 CHR, there will be times when the MACC piece wins and times when the CHR piece will win (depends on your target). At this point it becomes a matter of preference between what is more reliable (MACC), and what will give you the stronger edge against tougher mobs (CHR).
My personal preference is to pick the piece of gear that has the stronger edge. There are a lot of reasons why I do this, but the biggest reason is because if it does come down to the CHR dStat, then it already means I'm over-geared for my target and I'm going to have an adequate Magic Hit Rate. In no way am I suggesting everyone has to play this way, there are strategic uses for a reliance build too - especially if you don't do HNMs.
Also, don't think about CHR in the same way you do INT or MND, I'm talking of more of a DEX tier functionality, the way it is tiered for critical hits, where if you don't break a tier, it is pointless to add more of it. Not controverting the "More CHR=More m.acc." because I know it is true and thus adding more will benefit you, just saying that you can get to treshold or capped tier I'm referencing and then add more M.Acc, instead of going all out M.acc. and getting resisted from a weak CHR build.
In regards to DEX and Critical Hit Rate - There is no such tier. DEX operates on an exponential curve, which means you have to have lots of it in order to see the larger gains - but every point of DEX increases your Critical Hit Rate (unless your capped at 20%). This has been extensively tested, and the math for it has been released by Studio Gobli (which many assume the data is generated from SE insiders).
Back to CHR - There is no part of the MACC formula that works like DEX does for Critical Hit Rate. Low/High stat builds have been tested and exhibit predictable MACC rates.
You can surely find the info on the mythical ~120CHR figure somewhere around here, I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who noticed while debuffing sky/sea/limbus that if you didn't get to that number, you just were doinitwrong, since nothing was landing, aside from retarded stuff like Genbu which required /blm at the time, not sure about now. (That's a mob I'd like to test on, now that I think about it)
Why can you not understand that the community was incorrect in its assumptions? The system you are describing was theoretical (not proven), and was found to be wrong. Your sitting in the middle of 4+ year-old knowledge. I'm not debating that people used to think this was true, I'm telling you it is incorrect.
I don't see why your stuck on something that was never tested and proven - when you have one person doing 8,000 tests with 95% confidence, and hundreds of other smaller tests that support it. Not to mention that there are NO tests that show the system works differently for CHR or supports any type of method you describe. All of these tests began back in 2008, so none of this information is exactly new now. Most people stopped believing in the 120 Cap even before then.
If your unwilling to provide accurate data that proves your system works, or do the work yourself, then please stop providing advice regarding a system that has been debunked years ago.
If you need links, let me know and I'll provide what I can. I'm not the go-to person for every available resource/test, but I can most certainly point you to references that can get you started. Having a JPN Translator might help too. Edited, Oct 28th 2010 7:00am by Asmoranomar