PDA

View Full Version : Paladin Prot Rotation



VenomXII
01-23-2009, 05:18 AM
Hey you Paladins,

I'm Looking to see if there is any better spell rotation then what im using now.

Currently i do this:

Avengers's Sheild
Holy shield
Judge light/wisdom
Hand of Reckoning
Shield Slam
Hammer of the Righteous
Consecrate

Rinse/Repeat

Now i have 2 points into improved Judgements.

So what do you all think?
BTW my Paladins name is Aeus, i have him listed in the drop down above.

Comments, constructive criticism welcomed, Flamers need not apply.

Paxi
01-23-2009, 05:30 AM
I really doesn't see the need for Hand of Reckoning in any rotation at all. The standard 969 rotation would give you much more threat / dmg.

jere
01-23-2009, 05:51 AM
http://www.tankspot.com/forums/f200/42445-paladin-threat-dps-rotation.html

Take a read through that and see if that helps explain it.

Kelstet
01-23-2009, 05:54 AM
You only need to have one point into imp judgements, we as paladin's use a 969 rotation. The 969 is referring to the cooldowns of the abilities we use. Somethings I would change with your rotation, Out of combat Holy Shield, Then Avengers shield, Shield of Righteousness (highest threat ability) unless there's still distance before the mob gets then in that case us Hammer of Righteousness, Judge, SoR or HoR whichever you didn't use, then consecrate if it's a group or Holy shield if not.

Kel

Terdrix
01-23-2009, 06:19 AM
Hey you Paladins,
Currently i do this:

Avengers's Sheild
Holy shield
Judge light/wisdom
Hand of Reckoning
Shield Slam
Hammer of the Righteous
Consecrate

Rinse/Repeat

Now i have 2 points into improved Judgements.


The general idea is there, but there is no need for hand of reckoning as part of the standard rotation. Mixing things up a little from what you are doing now will optimize your cooldowns better. Basically, it amounts to have two groups of abilities to use.

The first group includes: (~9 second cooldown abilities)

Consecrate
Exorcism
Judgements
Holy Shield


The second group includes: (6 second cool down abilities)

Shield of Righteousness
Hammer of the Righteous


Note that 1 point into improved judgements is needed to do the 9696 rotation here, otherwise judgements have a 10 second cooldown. the basic jist is to weave abilities from group 1 into abilities from group 2. So your rotation would become something along the lines of:


Avengers's Sheild
Holy shield
Shield of Righteousness
Judgement
Hammer of the Righteous
Consecrate/Exorcism
Shield of Righteousness

Rinse and repeat....
*note that Hammer and Shield of right will alternate position in the rotation.

The order can be setup in two macros that you "weave" so the first would cast Holy shield, Judgement, Consecrate. The second would cast Shield of Righteousness and Hammer of the Righteous. That said I myself prefer to weave the rotation manually to keep flexibility. I do however have the macros setup for fights where I need to concentrate more on the mechanics and let my rotation be pretty automatic.

MestHoop
01-25-2009, 06:17 AM
Quick side note:
I personally prefer to start off with HotR as first 6 second cooldown, and then go for judge and then ShoR. This only because of the badge libram (so giving a bit more burst TPS).

Depends on how trigger happy your raid is I guess.

jere
01-25-2009, 04:18 PM
Quick side note:
I personally prefer to start off with HotR as first 6 second cooldown, and then go for judge and then ShoR. This only because of the badge libram (so giving a bit more burst TPS).

Depends on how trigger happy your raid is I guess.

It actually doesn't matter the order. In any given 18 second time frame, any 96969 combination will yield 2 judgements and 3 ShoR. In any combination, 2 ShoR out of the 3 will be paired with the 2 Judgements. One of those two ShoR will happen 4.5 seconds after a judgment, but it will make it in time to get the libram buff. You can do them in any order as long as it is done as 96969.

Camulos
02-25-2009, 11:39 PM
I am not good at writing macros..can someone show me what macros they are using please.


The general idea is there, but there is no need for hand of reckoning as part of the standard rotation. Mixing things up a little from what you are doing now will optimize your cooldowns better. Basically, it amounts to have two groups of abilities to use.


The first group includes: (~9 second cooldown abilities)

Consecrate
Exorcism
Judgements
Holy Shield


The second group includes: (6 second cool down abilities)

Shield of Righteousness
Hammer of the Righteous

Note that 1 point into improved judgements is needed to do the 9696 rotation here, otherwise judgements have a 10 second cooldown. the basic jist is to weave abilities from group 1 into abilities from group 2. So your rotation would become something along the lines of:


Avengers's Sheild
Holy shield
Shield of Righteousness
Judgement
Hammer of the Righteous
Consecrate/Exorcism
Shield of Righteousness

Rinse and repeat....
*note that Hammer and Shield of right will alternate position in the rotation.

The order can be setup in two macros that you "weave" so the first would cast Holy shield, Judgement, Consecrate. The second would cast Shield of Righteousness and Hammer of the Righteous. That said I myself prefer to weave the rotation manually to keep flexibility. I do however have the macros setup for fights where I need to concentrate more on the mechanics and let my rotation be pretty automatic.

jere
02-26-2009, 05:26 AM
It would be something like:

#showtooltip
/castsequence reset=6 spell1,spell2

and

#showtooltip
/castsequence reset=9 spell1,spell2,spell3

though I don't suggest macro'ing the 9 second ones as I like having the utility of doing them separate for certain fights. The 6 second cooldowns are close enough to macro without losing much functionality.

Camulos
02-26-2009, 10:36 AM
Thanks!

And BTW, excellent information in your other post.

Ratanna
03-02-2009, 01:53 PM
dont listen to some of these guys. Hand of Reckoning is OFF GCD. i use that shit on CD. I toss Avenger shield and hand of reckoning at the same time. More TPS/DMG more mana spent = more spiritual attunement threat. You don't get SA threat if ur at 100% mana.

jere
03-02-2009, 02:12 PM
dont listen to some of these guys. Hand of Reckoning is OFF GCD. i use that shit on CD. I toss Avenger shield and hand of reckoning at the same time. More TPS/DMG more mana spent = more spiritual attunement threat. You don't get SA threat if ur at 100% mana.

I don't think anyone in the thread said it was on global cooldown. As long as you don't need to taunt ever in the fight, go ahead and use it (though put it in macro to reduce human response time issues), however, it is only going to add on the order of 7-11 DPS + 8-9 TPS from regenerating 135 mana every 8 seconds. It's more DPS if that is what you are looking for, though I personally don't see the need to do that and prefer to have it available incase something goes wrong.

VenomXII
03-03-2009, 06:03 PM
Another question for you all, you all say that there are ablitiys on a 9 second cooldown.

consecrate being one of them, from my toolbar it shows consecrate on an 8 sec cooldown.

now if you are saying 9 sec cause your including the GCD i can see that.

But if thats not being included then why say its a 9 sec CD when it clearly shows its on an 8 Sec CD

Niian
03-03-2009, 06:18 PM
because saying 969 works better than 969686969686
And because of the rotation you won't be able to press consecrate every 8 seconds.

jere
03-03-2009, 07:56 PM
because saying 969 works better than 969686969686
And because of the rotation you won't be able to press consecrate every 8 seconds.

Yep, exactly. You will press consecration every 9 seconds, not every 8, so it is counted as a 9 second cooldown (think, honorary member). The GCD would prevent you from casting it sooner in the rotation anyways.

Holy Shield is the same. Its cooldown is 8 seconds, but we refresh it at 9 as well. The difference here is that HS actually lasts 10 seconds, so it has a 100% uptime, while consecration only has an 8/9ths uptime.

theckhd
03-10-2009, 01:32 PM
Might be worth noting here that learning your 969 rotation is still worthwhile for 3.1. So far my analytical testing (http://www.failsafedesign.com/maintankadin/viewtopic.php?p=389329#389329) suggests that standard 969 will still be the most reasonable rotation that has guaranteed Holy Shield uptime. The only rotation that performs better and doesn't sacrifice Holy Shield uptime is replacing every other Judgement with Exorcism, which runs the risk of JotJ downtime.

jere
03-10-2009, 04:19 PM
Might be worth noting here that learning your 969 rotation is still worthwhile for 3.1. So far my analytical testing (http://www.failsafedesign.com/maintankadin/viewtopic.php?p=389329#389329) suggests that standard 969 will still be the most reasonable rotation that has guaranteed Holy Shield uptime. The only rotation that performs better and doesn't sacrifice Holy Shield uptime is replacing every other Judgement with Exorcism, which runs the risk of JotJ downtime.

Did you run that while accounting for the Libram of Obstruction as well?

theckhd
03-11-2009, 03:13 PM
No, I don't model LoO at all in these calculations, because they're modular, so it calculates stat benefits first and sorts out the rotation at the end. It's something that can be added in relatively easily, and is on my list of things to do.

Adding LoO will help reduce the gap between 969 and the exorcism-weaving rotations, but I doubt it will be a significant enough bump to change the relative ordering.

jere
03-11-2009, 03:24 PM
I guess all I would need to check was if the difference between judgement and exorcism was 674 damage or less (though adjusted for crit/miss/partial resist I guess). If so, then you would keep judgement for a 0/53/18 spec, otherwise, you would go exorcism. Do you remember what the modelled numbers for those two abilities were (on average) for a 0/53/18 off chance?

On an alternate note, I guess there is some utility in keeping LoO up in terms of damage mitigation, but that would be more of a personal choice.

theckhd
03-12-2009, 08:44 AM
I added LoO to the simulation, and it seems to have a bigger effect (http://maintankadin.failsafedesign.com/viewtopic.php?p=392321#392321) than I expected. Judgement-substitution falls far behind by losing the extra ShoR damage.

For reference, with the 0/5x/18c spec, here are the damage values for the two pertinent glyph combinations:


Ability glyphed unglyphed
Judgement 2371 2156
Exorcism 2957 2464

jere
03-12-2009, 01:17 PM
So I am not totally crazy then (only partially right)?

Thoughtseize
08-09-2009, 06:34 AM
dont listen to some of these guys. Hand of Reckoning is OFF GCD. i use that shit on CD. I toss Avenger shield and hand of reckoning at the same time. More TPS/DMG more mana spent = more spiritual attunement threat. You don't get SA threat if ur at 100% mana.

=D

Now that 3.2 has rolled around with the Hand change to do fair amounts of damage his comment actually improved. The damage to things not targeting you can fire off on pulls, and it makes for a nice little opener, especially if it crits.

Still commonsense always applies, if it's an iffy aoe pull, consider your need for taunts first if things could go less than smooth.

Quinnly
08-09-2009, 04:24 PM
Ive often wondered about the whole 969 rotation, I find that doing a priority rotation generates me much more threat. Any particular reason why that might be?

elfjorc
08-09-2009, 05:25 PM
Ive often wondered about the whole 969 rotation, I find that doing a priority rotation generates me much more threat. Any particular reason why that might be?

What are you mesuring your sustained threat by?

Certainly if you're following up a ShoR with a Hammer etc., you'd get a bigger burst for that moment, but the 9-6-9-6's purpose is to have the highest sustained threat with no downtime where you're waiting for one of the abilities to come off cooldown.

Irat
08-09-2009, 05:25 PM
So I am not totally crazy then (only partially right)?

Definatly not totally.

You talking about front loaded threat or about threat over a whole fight Quinnly?

I think you'll find that you can cram more threat into the first 6 sec of a fight by going something like:

Exo
AS
SotR
HotR

But you will find that as you going longer into the fight you get conflicts and then missed GCDs then eventually fall into something like the 96969 anyway. The reason why the 969 rotation is so popular is because it maintains 100% HS uptime (which should be a priority even thou it isnít great for threat) and lets you cast something every single GCD without any conflicts.

Quinnly
08-09-2009, 07:30 PM
What are you mesuring your sustained threat by?

Certainly if you're following up a ShoR with a Hammer etc., you'd get a bigger burst for that moment, but the 9-6-9-6's purpose is to have the highest sustained burst with no downtime where you're waiting for one of the abilities to come off cooldown.

I generally burst about 10k, and sustain 6.5-7. and the only down time is if I toss in an exorcism something else will come up for a second.

jere
08-09-2009, 07:44 PM
How are you measuring those values? And for what fights? You won't have the same threat numbers on every fight. They will vary.

The main thing is a FCFS priority rotation won't outthreat a 96969 rotation if you are trying to keep holy shield and judgement up 100%. Theck has done the analysis on it over at maintankadin. That's not to say your priority rotation isn't good, but if it isn't alternating 6 second cooldowns with a cooldown in betweem, you are missing out on threat. You are wasting global cooldowns and missing out on possible threat you could have done. We hashed it out back when wotlk came out, taking various threat rotations and comparing them, and later on, peeps, like theck, modeled it all out. 96969 is not made for burst, and that is fine. Use a burst rotation. But 96969 is made for sustained threat fights, and it excels there above all others so far.

If you aren't trying to keep up Holy Shield and Judgement for 100% coverage, then you probably will do more threat, but doing a priority rotation means you aren't doing that, unless you are dropping GCD's to wait for HS and Judgement to come off cooldown, and then you are just wasting potential threat.

Check out this thread, there is a section on FCFS rotations. You are also welcome to ask questions there and request simulations. They might have already been done.
Maintankadin • View topic - Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work) (http://www.failsafedesign.com/maintankadin/viewtopic.php?t=20823)

Also note, that honestly, the threat of a FCFS is close enough to a 96969 that it probably doesn't matter. Mathematically, the 96969 will have more TPS, but there is room there for player skill as well. In the end if you use priority FCFS, then that is fine, but 96969 is definitely not less sustained threat if executed properly.

Martie
08-09-2009, 09:32 PM
I need to start out my comments to this thread by saying some less then nice things.

<bla bla bla>sustained burst<bla bla bla>
You just lost your entire point by saying this. If you can sustain it, it's not burst.


I generally burst about 10k, and sustain 6.5-7. and the only down time is if I toss in an exorcism something else will come up for a second.
Yeah - casting spells with a cast time is a really smart thing to do while tanking. Except that you won't be dodging, blocking or parrying anything, and it stops and restarts your melee swings.


<good points> Mathematically, the 96969 will have more TPS, but there is room there for player skill as well.
NO THERE IS NOT!
If you mathematically prove something, discussion ends. Period. Nothing else about it. Player skill does not enter in to it.
Sure, it may take time to get used to the 969 rotation if you are doing it in another way, but that doesn't equal player skill - it just means you are comparing the effectiveness of something you are good at to the effectiveness of something you are not good at, a really dumb comparison to make.

Now, to get back to the point, here is what I do.
I use 969, rely on it, and do great threat. I don't always start out the fight using 969, though. Since it takes ten or so seconds to get to a max threat situation (five stacks of seal of corruption), it pays off to start out with a bit of burst sometimes - you only need one triggerhappy dps to pull aggro, and that can kill you in a fight.
It is for that exact same reason that I don't use my taunt during the pull - I may need it three seconds into the fight.
I use taunt singular because I believe out multi-target taunt is a piece of crap. Since you cannot control what it targets, relying on it or getting used to using it is a very bad thing.

Now, I'm not sure about you guys, but my exorcism doesn't do more damage then my hotr, cons or shotr, it lacks the usefulness of judgement, and doesn't do enough threat to outweigh dropping holy shield for.
Why are you even considering using it, especially now that it has a cast time?

Using my AS is something I thought about in my rotation, but I find it too usefull as a spell to cast in concert with my taunt should I need to pick something up quickly - and again there's the fact that it doesn't do all that much damage.

Maelstrom
08-10-2009, 04:46 AM
I use taunt singular because I believe out multi-target taunt is a piece of crap. Since you cannot control what it targets, relying on it or getting used to using it is a very bad thing.

Guess you didn't tank during TBC. :p Righteous Defence is fine, if you need to taunt more than 3 mobs, the idea of "control" with grabbing them is a total fallacy anyway. You RD 3 off, AS another three, HoR another and anything else will need to wait until you're in melee range. Hell you don't even need to use a macro for it anymore. Also righteous defence combined with unit frames such as grid makes for an exceptionally powerful pickup ability for loose mobs, no other class has anything like it (closest is intervene, which is inferior).

theckhd
08-10-2009, 05:18 AM
NO THERE IS NOT!
If you mathematically prove something, discussion ends. Period. Nothing else about it. Player skill does not enter in to it.
Sure, it may take time to get used to the 969 rotation if you are doing it in another way, but that doesn't equal player skill - it just means you are comparing the effectiveness of something you are good at to the effectiveness of something you are not good at, a really dumb comparison to make.
Many things have been "mathematically proven" and accepted as fact, only to be proven wrong later on once new information became available (perhaps one of the underlying assumptions or axioms was in error, etc).

In any event, player skill does enter into 969, at least as far as knowing when not to follow the rotation. Knowing when and which abilities to skip or substitute for is a good example. A paladin that subs Avenger's Shield or Sacred Shield into his rotation can nerf or buff his TPS by a fairly significant amount depending on where he substitutes it.

-------------------

As for the FCFS discussion, I've made some posts on the topic recently that show the parallel between 969 and FCFS. This post (http://maintankadin.failsafedesign.com/viewtopic.php?p=470257#p470257) in particular might be worth reading. It was in response to someone who suggested that they had an FCFS that did "better" than 969, which is what "your FCFS" is referring to.

969 is an FCFS. It just happens to be one with a very particular set of initial conditions and priority queue, or as I prefer to think of it two separate priority queues. Your FCFS is essentially a 969 rotation. You are alternating between 6-second cooldowns and "everything else." The only difference between 969 and your FCFS is the choice of priority queue for the "everything else" slots:

There seems to be this misconception floating about that 969 is the optimum threat rotation. It isn't. It's the best threat you can get while keeping 100% Holy Shield uptime and minimizing JotJ downtime. Those are two pretty big and noticeable constraints. It should be fairly obvious that substituting a higher threat ability for a lower one will increase threat output. Unfortunately, since Holy Shield and Judgement are our two lowest-threat abilities, this inevitably means you're gaining threat at the cost of survivability.


The fact that your rotation out-threats 969 is not surprising, because it's exactly the same reason that HSsE (sub Exorcism for HS) and EoC (Exorcism on cooldown) out-threat 969. They either replace or push back the lowest-DPS spell we cast (Holy Shield) in favor of a higher one, at the cost of Holy Shield uptime.
....
The point of all of this is that you don't choose to use 969 over a FCFS because "fewer buttons is easier." You choose it because it gives you the best threat within the constraints of 100% Holy Shield uptime and the lowest chance for JotJ to fall off. There are numerous discussions in this thread about the threat gain of substituting Exorcism or AS for Judgement, and whether it's worth the chance of JotJ downtime.

jere
08-10-2009, 07:24 AM
NO THERE IS NOT!
If you mathematically prove something, discussion ends. Period. Nothing else about it. Player skill does not enter in to it.
Sure, it may take time to get used to the 969 rotation if you are doing it in another way, but that doesn't equal player skill - it just means you are comparing the effectiveness of something you are good at to the effectiveness of something you are not good at, a really dumb comparison to make.


I would have to disagree here. Mathematically proving something only defines what is possible, given the defined constraints (if any). Player skill doesn't excuse poorer performance, but it does explain why it might be there. There is a lot of decision making the 96969 rotation that people don't really consider. They think they can make a 1 button macro and spam that all day. That might work for most of the content enough to get by, but you typically are losing a lot of efficiency doing that in a lot of fights where you could have been contributing more. Player skill is a bigger part of the 96969 rotation than you give credit for (or perhaps we simply define player skill differently. I include the decision making process as well as the button mashing). I think Theck's comments are spot on.



There seems to be this misconception floating about that 969 is the optimum threat rotation. It isn't. It's the best threat you can get while keeping 100% Holy Shield uptime and minimizing JotJ downtime. Those are two pretty big and noticeable constraints. It should be fairly obvious that substituting a higher threat ability for a lower one will increase threat output. Unfortunately, since Holy Shield and Judgement are our two lowest-threat abilities, this inevitably means you're gaining threat at the cost of survivability.
Very good point, I think in the quest to teach people good tanking habits (keeping HS and Judgement up 100%), we sometimes lose sight of the context of things (what the 96969 rotation really does). I was taking the discussion with the assumption of content where you need to keep HS and Judgement up 100% of the time, but that may not be the case.

theckhd
08-10-2009, 10:50 AM
Very good point, I think in the quest to teach people good tanking habits (keeping HS and Judgement up 100%), we sometimes lose sight of the context of things (what the 96969 rotation really does). I was taking the discussion with the assumption of content where you need to keep HS and Judgement up 100% of the time, but that may not be the case.
That wasn't really directed at you. I've just noticed that we've had a streak of people posting about a "new rotation" they've figured out that's higher-threat than 969, as if it was some sort of revelation.

Never mind the fact that 969 isn't solely a threat-optimized rotation, or that so far every one of the "new rotations" has been a 969-variant that you or I calculated back in February.

I may have to dig out the FCFS code and update it just so I can post a full theoretical treatment with pretty graphs. A basic post on the underlying premises of rotations might be a useful thing to have around.

Martie
08-10-2009, 01:46 PM
I would have to disagree here. Mathematically proving something only defines what is possible, given the defined constraints (if any). Player skill doesn't excuse poorer performance, but it does explain why it might be there.
And there is the bad comparison.

If you want to compare a perfectly-executed non969 rotation to a 969 rotation, then you should use a perfectly-executed 969 rotation as well. In these cases, 969 wins out.

Martie
08-10-2009, 01:52 PM
There seems to be this misconception floating about that 969 is the optimum threat rotation. It isn't. It's the best threat you can get while keeping 100% Holy Shield uptime and minimizing JotJ downtime. Those are two pretty big and noticeable constraints. It should be fairly obvious that substituting a higher threat ability for a lower one will increase threat output. Unfortunately, since Holy Shield and Judgement are our two lowest-threat abilities, this inevitably means you're gaining threat at the cost of survivability.
What higher threat abilities?
Avengers shield may work, if glyphed, but that's once every thirty seconds.
With the new way judgements work, it may boost your threat a bit if you replaced a judgement by a AS every now and then, but using it on cooldown won't fit in with the other abilities you have (which are on 6 and 8 second cooldowns).
Exorcism is a bad idea to use, it has a casting time now, which makes you vulnerable (and costs you melee swing threat.) It also clashes with other cooldowns.
Holy wrath is an option, but it's use is highly situational, and it suffers from the same cooldown issue that AS does.

And remember - all those abilities are spells, so they'll miss a lot more then your other abilities.

For the rest, what really is there?

jere
08-10-2009, 02:02 PM
No, I was comparing his FCFS rotation to a poorly played 96969 rotation on purpose. To do otherwise would not make any sense in the context of the conversation, especially if the reason for the difference in the poster's experience is a skill based consideration. A bad comparison in this context would be to compare a perfect FCFS to a perfect 96969 rotation as that isn't supported by the data found by the poster at all. Player skill is an important component. However, as Theck's comments alluded to, it could simply be that he isn't trying to keep HS and Judgement up 100%.

As for substitutions, in 3.2 you would typically look at AS (yes even unglyphed...also, this crits and is affected by hit as a melee ability, not as a spell) and Hammer of Wrath (when applicable). Exorcism doesn't cause cooldown clashes at all. It is a 1.5 second cast, which is exactly the length of the GCD. There are situations where you can use it and not be vulnerable (XT and Vezax for example). However, the melee swing threat as you noted is a decent consideration. The trick is determining if the Exorcism threat you get is more than the loss in melee swing threat for that period. That would be fun to model. I agree that it should be avoided in general, as you suggest, though.

elfjorc
08-10-2009, 06:31 PM
You just lost your entire point by saying this. If you can sustain it, it's not burst.


That was a simple case of me mistyping and meaning to say "sustained threat".

Anyway, as they mentioned, HS uptime, Judgments of the Just uptime, and now potentially LoO uptime come into play. I just have a tendency to assume those as a given as far as tanking aims (especially keeping Holy Shield up if you're being hit).

Martie
08-10-2009, 06:44 PM
No, I was comparing his FCFS rotation to a poorly played 96969 rotation on purpose. To do otherwise would not make any sense in the context of the conversation, especially if the reason for the difference in the poster's experience is a skill based consideration.
Well, I'll state it again - it's a bad comparison to make. Of course a badly played 969 rotation will do worse then a well-executed and thought out other rotation.
That should be so obvious it's not worth stating in my opinion, of course.

It should also be quite obvious that hanging blindly to the rotation isn't smart, and trying to use it while not in melee range is futile.

I personally prefer throwing up my divine guardians on XT's tantrums, though.
(Please don't assume that an 'optimal threat' rotation is relevant during nontankable burn phases.)

jere
08-10-2009, 08:27 PM
Well, I'll state it again - it's a bad comparison to make. Of course a badly played 969 rotation will do worse then a well-executed and thought out other rotation.
That should be so obvious it's not worth stating in my opinion, of course.

It should also be quite obvious that hanging blindly to the rotation isn't smart, and trying to use it while not in melee range is futile.

I personally prefer throwing up my divine guardians on XT's tantrums, though.
(Please don't assume that an 'optimal threat' rotation is relevant during nontankable burn phases.)

The person I was responding to says "hey my priority FCFS rotation does more than 969". My basic response is "not really, the 969 has better TPS unless it has something to do with skill" (the part you originally quoted). My whole premise is unless he is doing it wrong, the 969 is more TPS than his FCFS rotation (assuming 100% uptime of HS and Judgement for both). Do you disagree with that? Also, why the belittling comments? They hardly seem necessary? You can always convey disagreement without being mean. If I have done something to offend you, I apologize, but I didn't do anything on purpose for sure.

Daereg
08-11-2009, 01:31 AM
Divine Plea to begin with of course, should open attacks with Exorcism these days, then cast Hand of Reckoning just as its hitting the boss so both work, Avenger's Shield as it runs towards you; get your big-threat moves in(Shield of the Righteous/Hammer of the Righteous) then gogo 6969696969696969 (http://www.tankspot.com/forums/f200/42445-paladin-threat-dps-rotation.html).
I don't know how many tanks follow 6969 to the letter(or number?) I know I don't, it just comes naturally but I guess its a good guide if you're starting out or getting used to what moves to press and when.

Synapse
08-11-2009, 03:58 AM
Divine Plea to begin with of course, should open attacks with Exorcism these days, then cast Hand of Reckoning just as its hitting the boss so both work, Avenger's Shield as it runs towards you; get your big-threat moves in(Shield of the Righteous/Hammer of the Righteous) then gogo 6969696969696969 (http://www.tankspot.com/forums/f200/42445-paladin-threat-dps-rotation.html).
I don't know how many tanks follow 6969 to the letter(or number?) I know I don't, it just comes naturally but I guess its a good guide if you're starting out or getting used to what moves to press and when.

How do you hit Hand of Reckoning after an exo-pull and still do damage? Exorcism, having a cast time and no missile, hits as soon as the cast is done.

Daereg
08-11-2009, 04:01 AM
How do you hit Hand of Reckoning after an exo-pull and still do damage? Exorcism, having a cast time and no missile, hits as soon as the cast is done.
Lag.
I guess its the same way as a caster you hit your next move just as your last move is about to finish casting.

Synapse
08-11-2009, 04:02 AM
Lag.
I guess its the same way as a caster you hit your next move just as your last move is about to finish casting.
That is not overlapping spells, that'ss just casting them in the right amount of time to overcome latency. The spells are still leaving in a linear fashion, and arriving the same way(missile speeds aside)

elfjorc
08-11-2009, 05:11 AM
The spells are still leaving in a linear fashion, and arriving the same way(missile speeds aside)This is where "skill" translates to " know that mashing buttons multiple times between each GCD works better than not"?

Synapse
08-11-2009, 05:14 AM
This is where "skill" translates to " know that mashing buttons multiple times between each GCD works better than not"?
More or less.

Except that, using a latency addon, I can do the same without carpal tunnels or having to buy new keyboards every three weeks.

In WoW, skill was never the coordination to cast your abilities. It's more or a passive thing, like management of cooldowns, observing the events in the environment, and so on.

theckhd
08-11-2009, 06:17 AM
What higher threat abilities?
Avengers shield may work, if glyphed, but that's once every thirty seconds.
With the new way judgements work, it may boost your threat a bit if you replaced a judgement by a AS every now and then, but using it on cooldown won't fit in with the other abilities you have (which are on 6 and 8 second cooldowns).
Exorcism is a bad idea to use, it has a casting time now, which makes you vulnerable (and costs you melee swing threat.) It also clashes with other cooldowns.
Holy wrath is an option, but it's use is highly situational, and it suffers from the same cooldown issue that AS does.

And remember - all those abilities are spells, so they'll miss a lot more then your other abilities.

For the rest, what really is there?
Jere already covered most of this, but:


In 3.2, Avenger's Shield (both glyphed and unglyphed) and Hammer of Wrath both do more damage than Holy Shield/Judgement. Substituting AS or HoW in for either HS or Judgement will give a net TPS increase.
In 3.1 we also had Exorcism, which filled a similar role (better than HS/Jud), and was the more common substitution option (i.e. every other Judgement). Now that it has a cast time it's not really worth considering, but at the time a lot of research was done (much of it by me) as to how best to integrate it into the rotation.
969 is simply an FCFS with a set of priority queues that places Holy Shield and Judgement, our two weakest damage abilities, at the top of the queue. Quite rigorously, the queues would be:

Queue 1 - 6s cooldowns: ShoR > HotR
Queue 2 - 9s cooldowns: HS > Jud > Cons


It's not surprising at all that one could come up with a higher-TPS rotation by rearranging that queue to put the higher-damage abilities above HS/Jud, i.e. AS > Cons > HoW > Jud > HS. That would definitely result in HS downtime though, and increase JotJ downtime due to many fewer Judgements being cast.



Players also occasionally weave in utility spells (Sacred Shield, HoP/HoFree/HoSalv/HoSac/LoH for some obvious examples). While some of these are panic buttons and don't get planned out, a skilled tank can still manage to sub these in "correctly" to minimize threat loss. That's where the skill argument comes in, though it's somewhat a side discussion from the threat question.

Zadaris
08-14-2009, 02:00 AM
The proper rotation for Tankadin is the 969 rotation. It's maximum threat while also keeping up holy shield.

The entire rotation goes as follows:

Holy Shield - Hammer of the Righteous - Judgement - Shield of Righteousness - Consecration - Hammer of Judgement

Then

Holy Shield - Shield of Righteousness - Judgement - Consecration - Hammer of the Righteous - Shield of Righteousness.

The easiest way to have this rotation down is to use bartender, make two action bars with 6 buttons max, and put the actions in the space it belongs in order to the rotation.

Also, to do the 969 rotation you do not need two points in Improved Judgements, only one point.

theckhd
08-26-2009, 04:15 PM
Just to put some hard numbers behind this discussion, I've re-run a very thorough simulation of FCFS rotations for 3.2, and written an incredibly long and in-depth tutorial on the subject over at maintankadin. Hopefully this puts to rest some of the misconceptions about the similarities and differences between 969 and FCFS rotations.
Advanced Training 101: 969 and FCFS Theorycraft (http://maintankadin.failsafedesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=25582)

Darkdestruction
04-13-2010, 12:38 AM
I find this 9696 rotation to be better suited for when I reverse it to 6969 and add a few touches of my own to it. I have gotten 15k dps as prot on 10 ICC trash and 8k dps at the end of many 5 man heroics with a 2.7k to 3.4k or so gs. Note that I have quit playing the live servers and now am playing on private servers. Here's how my rotation goes:

Major Glyphs: Divine Plea, Hammer of Righteousness, Judgement
This provides me with lots of aoe aggro and also good for maintaining single target aggro with some mitigation due to Divine Plea.

Minor Glyphs: Sense Undead, Blessing of Kings, Lay on Hands
More dmg from Sense Undead, reduced mana cost BoK for raids, lower cd for LoH

Abilities used:

6: Hammer of Righteousness, Shield of Righteousness
9: Consecration, Holy Shield, Judgement
Miscellaneous abilities: Hand of Reckoning, Avenger's Shield, Exorcism

My rotation is as follows:

Mobs are grouped together/near enough for Avenger's Shield to hit most/all of them = Exo+Hand of Reckoning(no GCD) + Avenger's Shield at the same time (has to be done really quick). Charge in. Hammer of Righteousness-->Holy Shield-->Shield of Righteousness-->Consecration-->Hammer of Righteousness-->+Judgement

Exorcism can easily be weaved into the rotation and it gives me more threat and reduces my mana further for Spiritual Attunement threat. It is reccommended that you weave it in before Judgement. Judgement is last because it has low threat unless it crits, and has low dmg. Hammer of Righteousness is first for instant aggro and it applies SoV dot to at most 4 targets. Holy Shield second for almost-instant mitigation.

If mobs are not close together, use this rotation instead:
Exorcism+Hand of Reckoning-->Charge in, now they are grouped near you-->Avenger's Shield-->Hammer of Righteousness-->Holy Shield-->Shield of Righteousness-->Consecration-->Hammer of Righteousness-->Judgement

Using this improved rotation of the 9696, I have only lost aggro ONCE in my raiding career. It was against a leet druid tank with 65k hp raid buffed -_-
Note that you should NOT use Exorcism if there are more than 2 mobs. The interruption is not worth the TPS/Dmg and it actually decreases your TPS/Dps. It is great for bosses though. I change the rotation as needed for the situation that I'm in. This rotation takes a lot to master, but once you get it, be rdy to get nerd raged at cuz you're a pally and that all pallies are op.

Also, instead of going "OMG NOOB, HS SHOULD BE BEFORE HoR FOR THE MITIGATION AND SHOULD BE CAST BEFORE COMBAT," and things of that sort. I laugh at your ignorance when I get messages like that. It is only about 1.5 sec after HoR before you can cast HS, and that won't kill your healer that much, and it gets AoE threat better than HS right away in case you have a mage that wants to tank everything. This is what works for me, and I only ask you to try it out before extreme criticism is made. Took me 2 months to come up with this rotation and master it.

damionrayne
04-13-2010, 02:43 AM
On my paladin I use two castsequence macros with combat reset addition, so that ass soon as I leave combat they reset to default spells. I also keep all the spells I have in my macro's on my action bar.

As in Cider's tanking guide, situation awareness is big, being able to respond to a situation and pull out of a macro'd rotation, and change things in a dynamic situation is the mark of a good tank. So, use the castsequence macro's with the red ? icon so it shows the different Icons. Though, do not rely on the macro's, it will be your downfall.

jere
04-13-2010, 06:09 AM
I find this 9696 rotation to be better suited for when I reverse it to 6969 and add a few touches of my own to it. I have gotten 15k dps as prot on 10 ICC trash and 8k dps at the end of many 5 man heroics with a 2.7k to 3.4k or so gs. Note that I have quit playing the live servers and now am playing on private servers. Here's how my rotation goes:


Just so you know, a 6969 rotation is the same as a 9696 rotation. The only difference is which abilities you start with. The total threat they produce is the exact same.



Time 6969 9696
---- ---- ----
00.0 HotR Judg
01.5 HS ShoR
03.0 Shor HS
04.5 Cons HotR
06.0 HotR Cons
07.5 Judg ShoR
09.0 ShoR Judg
10.5 HS HotR
12.0 HotR HS
13.5 Cons ShoR
15.0 ShoR Cons
16.5 Judg HotR
REPEAT


BOTH rotations have exactly:
3x HotR
3x ShoR
2x HS
2x Cons
2x Judg

There is no difference in the total threat whatsoever. The only difference will be on the pull, where you start with a higher amount of upfront threat, but that gets averaged out over time since the 96969 has the EXACT same sequence and the EXACT same number of abilities as the 6969 you are trying.

Technically, the highest threat pull (6969 or 9696) is going to be:
(Incoming) Exor+HoR+AS
(Incoming) Judgement
00.0 HotR
01.5 Consecration
03.0 ShoR
04.5 HS
CONTINUE

Which is, in reality, a 96969 rotation. You just launch the judgement as the boss is running in.

6969 rotations are the exact same as 9696 rotations in terms of total threat.

Also, as a note, while Exorcism on the pull is a good idea, Exorcism while something is hitting you is a major nono. It is nothing but a decrease in survivability and threat and dps for quite a few reasons:
1. You cannot dodge/parry/block while casting so you are going to take more damage.
2. It stops your melee swings and resets your swing timer, which takes out: Melee swings (LARGE DPS component) and SoV 5stack damage.
3. It has a higher miss rate than any of your other options. Exorcism is on the spell hit table and one time damage. HS and Cons spread it out over multiple ticks and HotR and ShoR are on melee hit
4. It has a lower crit damage value than either ShoR or HotR (Which is what you are replacing in your rotation if you do it right before judgement).

If you take the average damage Exorcism does and subtract out the ability you are replacing it with (HotR or ShoR, depending on which judgement you are going before), you will find that difference lower than the sum of the melee attacks and 5 stack SoV hits you lost from casting (and restarting the swing timer). Casting Exorcism while being wailed on by an enemy is not a good idea.

Jtree
04-13-2010, 03:26 PM
I started reading page 1, then spotted a remark about patch 3.1. Holy thread necromancy, Batman.


I find this 9696 rotation to be better suited for when I reverse it to 6969 and add a few touches of my own to it. I have gotten 15k dps as prot on 10 ICC trash and 8k dps at the end of many 5 man heroics with a 2.7k to 3.4k or so gs. Note that I have quit playing the live servers and now am playing on private servers.

Not to be rude, but AoE trash pulls don't matter much when looking at a pally tank's DPS. It's ALWAYS high in that situation. Check your DPS on a lone boss and see how that measures up. Of course, "private server" seems kinda suspect as well.

Sn1per
04-25-2010, 02:14 PM
Hey you Paladins,

Currently i do this:

Avengers's Sheild
Holy shield
Judge light/wisdom
Hand of Reckoning
Shield Slam
Hammer of the Righteous
Consecrate

Rinse/Repeat

Now i have 2 points into improved Judgements.

As Paxi said, there's no need to put Hand of Reckoning in your rotation; I would actually advise against doing so. Especially if you are a secondary/off-tank in a raid or you are dealing with a small number of mobs (e.g. a boss), you need to keep your HoR off of CD as much as possible. Personally, I would reorder your rotation:

Avengers's Shield
Consecration
Hammer of the Righteous
Holy Shield
Shield of Righteousness
Judgement

...for the following reasons. First, I have heard many different view concerning whether Consecration or Holy Shield generates more AoE threat, and I am inclined to think that Consecration will generate more considering how many mobs you will usually be fighting at once (please correct me if I am wrong). I put Hammer of the Righteous early on the rotation so that from early in the fight, you have the Seal of Vengeance DoT (if you're using it) on every mob. Judgement comes last because if this is your first run through the rotation, you want to use HP/mana, then regen HP/mana. I've found that by using JoL or JoW early in the fight, you max out on HP/mana, thus decreasing the efficiency and effectiveness of your Judgement.

Concerning macros:

Macros will make your rotation easier of manage, but will reduce your freedom to switch it up. Personally, I use two button macros: one for 6-sec rotations and one for 9-sec rotations. However, I also have all the abilities on an action bar, for the sake of flexibility.


It would be something like:

#showtooltip
/castsequence reset=6 spell1,spell2

and

#showtooltip
/castsequence reset=9 spell1,spell2,spell3

The reset on these macros will not work the way you want to. "reset=6" says, "the macro will reset 6 seconds after it was last called". For example, let's say you wanted to reset the macro while on spell1. You would have to wait 6 (or 9) seconds until it reset. A better option would be to have the macros reset when you left combat, or if you held down a modifier key while calling the macro:

/castsequence reset=combat/ctrl Hammer of the Righteous, Shield of Righteousness

and

/castsequence reset=combat/ctrl Consecration, Holy Shield, Judgement

The macro should automatically reset after casting the last spell in the sequence, if you hold down ctrl while you call it, or if you leave combat.

Hope this helped.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Sn1per
Level 73 Draenei Prot Paladin Hyjal Biblybopkins