+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 52

Thread: Paladin Prot Rotation

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    So I am not totally crazy then (only partially right)?

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Ratanna View Post
    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.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    25
    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?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Quinnly View Post
    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.
    Last edited by elfjorc; 08-10-2009 at 06:43 PM.
    Darielle || Chaos Theory || Tanaris(US)

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by jere View Post
    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.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by elfjorc View Post
    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.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    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)

    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.
    Last edited by jere; 08-09-2009 at 07:56 PM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,754
    I need to start out my comments to this thread by saying some less then nice things.
    Quote Originally Posted by elfjorc View Post
    <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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Quinnly View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by jere View Post
    <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.
    Last edited by Martie; 08-09-2009 at 09:48 PM.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    302
    Quote Originally Posted by Martie View Post
    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. 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).

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by Martie View Post
    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 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.
    Quote Originally Posted by Theck
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Theck
    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.
    "Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
    MATLAB TPS 4.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 4.0

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Martie View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by theckhd View Post
    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.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by jere View Post
    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.
    "Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
    MATLAB TPS 4.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 4.0

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,754
    Quote Originally Posted by jere View Post
    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.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,754
    Quote Originally Posted by theckhd View Post
    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?
    Last edited by Martie; 08-10-2009 at 02:00 PM.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    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.
    Last edited by jere; 08-10-2009 at 04:32 PM.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Martie View Post

    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).
    Last edited by elfjorc; 08-10-2009 at 07:01 PM.
    Darielle || Chaos Theory || Tanaris(US)

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,754
    Quote Originally Posted by jere View Post
    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.)

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Martie View Post
    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.
    Last edited by jere; 08-10-2009 at 09:00 PM.

  19. #39
    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.
    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.
    Last edited by Daereg; 08-11-2009 at 01:35 AM.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,405
    Quote Originally Posted by Daereg View Post
    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.
    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.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts