1. ## Starting Rotation?

This is my current starting rotation: VT-MB-DP-MF-SW:P (so I have 5 weaving when I cast it). Then I have a priority list of VT,MB,DP,MF (as filler).

Was wondering if I am doing it correctly. If anyone knows of a better starting rotation and can back it up that would be awesome.

2. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Looks good to me. The main thing is getting up to 5 weaving for the SW:P and then starting in with the VT>MB>DP>MF rotation.

3. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

You guys fail at reading stickies...

The proper priority is MB>VT>DP>MF, go read the shadowpriest dps 101 thread for the reasoning and math that proves it.

4. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Originally Posted by Worshaka
You guys fail at reading stickies...

The proper priority is MB>VT>DP>MF, go read the shadowpriest dps 101 thread for the reasoning and math that proves it.
They're talking about the starting rotation, what you do to get the 5 stacks of shadow weaving before applying SW:P

I personally do VT>MB>MF(It applies shadow weaving every time it hits) then use a SP trinket if I have one and cast SW:P>DP then after that, back to the priority system.

5. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Originally Posted by YigiBareTank
Looks good to me. The main thing is getting up to 5 weaving for the SW:P and then starting in with the VT>MB>DP>MF rotation.

6. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Originally Posted by Worshaka
Learn to look at more than one source?

http://elitistjerks.com/f77/t52579-s..._per_cooldown/

Although I haven't found any sticky on shadowpriest.com that has a priority system, most people have VT>MB

To add on, the dps "gained" from using either situation is negligible at best(8 dps is not going to kill you, right?)

7. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Your link to shadow priest basics doesn't even discuss the topic of priority conflicts, it simply bases the priority of spells according to their DPE (damage per execution time) which is a very short sighted view. For this reason I have no idea what you're trying to prove by posting that particular link.

The other post you linked actually discusses conflicts and introduces the topic of spell choice. Funnily enough that post concludes that MB > VT all be it with some conditions attached but considering 99.9% of encounters last longer than 60 seconds I think it's fair to say MB > VT in majority of cases.

The other point you are ignoring is that by casting VT before MB you guarantee a MB/VT conflict every 15seconds... it's pretty logical to conclude that the more VT/MB conflicts result in lost DPS so mitigating the amount of conflicts is going to increase your DPS. By casting MB before VT you will eliminate a conflict for several MB cycles. To give some numbers, casting VT>MB will delay every seconds MB by 1.5 seconds meaning your average possible MB cast will be 7.75 sec instead of 7 sec, that results in casting MB 10% less than possible. If you cast MB first you have to delay VT by 1.5 seconds but that conflict occurs less (approx 1 per minute), VT will tick 20 times in a minute, so delaying VT by 1/2 a tick every minute results in a massive 0.025% loss in DPS.

If you want to debunk my posts, perhaps link something that disproves my claim rather than reinforcing it.

8. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Did you read my last section? The dps "Gained" from MB>VT is not noticed

What I found both interesting and disturbing is how small these values actually are in comparison to the base DPS. By using MB for example, the maximum gain is 5.2% of the base DPS if we somehow manage to keep it on cooldown all the time. If we manage to raise our MB uptime from 80% to 90%, all we get is is a measly 0.5%.
We can also use it to determine the expected value of the theoretical max. DPS by simply adding up all the eDPCD values. For me this means that even if I somehow manage to have perfect uptime on all the nukes (not possible in practice), the best I can possibly do is 5,958.16 DPS on average.
The overall gain is small though. Using the above values, 1.5/15*eDPCD(MB) = 27 DPS, and 1.5/60*eDPCD(VT) = 19 DPS, so we gain at most 8 DPS by using MB>VT.
What I was trying to get at was that you're dps will not vary if using VT>MB or MB>VT as the difference is easily within probable error. So having a set of priority list and saying "This is the one and only true one" is being oblivious to the fact that your dps will not vary great enough to notice a difference. I personally use VT>MB for the simple fact to make sure that when I do use MB(Will probably right after), replenishment would be refreshed.

9. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

yes, dps indeed vary from one starting rotation to another...
vt then mb lead to conflict between the "refresh" of vt and mb going off cd....
this mean that you have to chose if is better to refresh the dot ( so having higher uptime ) or using mb as soon is off cd....
in either case, this will lead to a dps loss ( low ofc, but in a min/maxing game is always something ).

BTW, worth dissussing one thing too imho...wile mb>VT lead ( in the time ) to a higher DPS output, you have to consider that :

Starting with mb could lead to high threat spike ( not discussing about bad slow tank...but sometime also the good one could have a miss )

Starting with MB will lead to misery uptime lower ( or better....you don't have misery up when starting...mean there is the 3% possibility to have a miss on it...and this can not only lead to a dps loss, but also to mana loss and screwed opening rotation for swp ).

I normaly tend to prefer vt before mb for that reason....
no possibility to miss with my mb and few more sec for the tank for gathering some threat...
i sometime even start with vt then dp and swd ( and/or ve depend how mutch time is required to be in the optimal position....anyway, this situation rly don't happen often ) if is required some movement to be in position.

dps "Gained" from MB>VT is not noticed
if we wont oconsider this...well, is not even worth discussing about a starting rotation....
even the swp application ( after 5x stack ) is not that huge dps increse, and it wont kill you....but, as i told already, if we talk about min/maxing....then is worth to be considered

10. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

People still fail to read the stickies, I'm amazed.

11. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

This number crunching is making my head hurt. I'll go away and let you do your massive epeen-competition in peace... *leaves*

12. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Originally Posted by fabian
Did you read my last section? The dps "Gained" from MB>VT is not noticed
Completely disagree... casting MB before VT is a considerable DPS increase, I saw an increase of about 400 dps when I changed my priority from VT>MB to MB>VT, which was easily a 5% increase at the time.

Also, don't confuse your starting rotation of spells with the priority. The starting rotation should be something like VT > MB > DP > MF > SW:P (assuming all buffs/debuffs are up). Once you get to that point you start with the priority MB > VT > DP > MF, and utilise SW on a subjective basis.

I also challenge those who doubt MB > VT is anything significant to go trial the 2 rotations on a target dummy and compare parses. MB > VT should see MB cast no later than 7.2 seconds or you aren't doing it right. VT > MB will see MB cast every 7.9 seconds and you may get 1 extra tick of VT every minute (at best).

13. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Originally Posted by Worshaka
Completely disagree... casting MB before VT is a considerable DPS increase, I saw an increase of about 400 dps when I changed my priority from VT>MB to MB>VT, which was easily a 5% increase at the time.
8000 dps is a lot

The way it makes sense to me is that losing a tick or two of a dot (albeit a strong dot) is less consequential than losing a half a second or more on our nuke. I'm hardly a leet theorycrafter, but losing time on a dot seems like it would hurt us less than losing time on a nuke.

14. ## Re: Starting Rotation?

Originally Posted by fabian
Did you read my last section? The dps "Gained" from MB>VT is not noticed

What I was trying to get at was that you're dps will not vary if using VT>MB or MB>VT as the difference is easily within probable error. So having a set of priority list and saying "This is the one and only true one" is being oblivious to the fact that your dps will not vary great enough to notice a difference. I personally use VT>MB for the simple fact to make sure that when I do use MB(Will probably right after), replenishment would be refreshed.
Did you read Worshaka's beginning, middle, and end sections?!

The removal of conflicts is the REAL gain from casting MB before VT. He explained that casting VT before MB will cause them to be up at the same time by the 2nd MB cycle, which means you'll lose DPS from having to choose between them rather than just being able to continue a rotation.

Saying that VT before MB is better is short sighted, like Worshaka said.

You have to look AHEAD and see how casting a spell now will affect what you can cast later.

Originally Posted by Worshaka
Also, don't confuse your starting rotation of spells with the priority. The starting rotation should be something like VT > MB > DP > MF > SW:P (assuming all buffs/debuffs are up). Once you get to that point you start with the priority MB > VT > DP > MF, and utilise SW on a subjective basis.
This... don't confuse your normal cast priority with your "opening" cast priority.

#### Posting Permissions

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