This seems like an odd set of instructions. If below 65% and no atonement, then cast shadow mend. If below 65%, cast shadow mend. They just seem like the first entry doesn’t even matter. How does this entry favor refreshing atonement?
I’m curious (because again I cant read script) how the bot knows to utilize the Atonement uptime window, refreshing Atonement with Shadow Mend on the side and swapping from a spam Shadow Mend situation to a maintaining health position when spike damage has ended. The spec really does two jobs, and it doesn’t do either of them necessarily well without the other to compliment.
Lastly, is there a window im missing to see how each spell is contributing heals to atonement? Shouldnt mind games uptime be way higher? Its a 7k burst of damage that directly effects healing throughput.
You should turn on that log option on your simulation. Bottom left in the picture for Report Type drop down menu. The link you provided didnt have it turned on it seems.
The first entry in the rotation is looking to cast shadow mend on an ally with less then 65% health who does not have atonement up on them already.
The second entry will cast shadow mend on an ally with less than 65% health regardless of whether or not they have atonement on them already.
The idea is: if there were more than one ally with less than 65% health, you’d want to pick the one without atonement up on them already first.
When you are reading the report, you can see that Atonement breaks down each spell and shows its contribution to atonement healing. The line that reads “atonement” at the top is actually penance. Due to some technical limitations, I have to pick a spell to group all of them under - I picked penance, but there was no way for me to change the label to read penance instead of atonement.
Please make your own thread for holy paladin stuff. Link your simulations that you are referencing. If you actually want to learn to use the simulator, I will help you, but this post makes me think you are not really posting in good faith.
You are probably doing a simulation with very little damage going out, which is causing weird things to happen. Increasing the NPC damage multiplier in the settings to a more appropriate level for the gear you are simulating will make it work as expected.
There are also better places to read the rotation than that summary on the simulation report. If you click the Rotation link at the very top of the report:
You can load your specific character to adapt the rotation to it, or pick things on the left. This view displays the exact same logic as a combination decision tree/priority list.
Hey Swol, just wanted to pop on here and give you and the Mr. Robot team props for being the only ones in the WoW community actually bothering to take a scientific approach to min-maxing.
The egregious mistakes the theorycrafting community at large made with Demon Hunter magic damage reduction and Pelagos’ trait really go to show what a dismal state things are in right now. I’d be willing to bet that there are more oversights like that or the misunderstanding of haste’s value for Disc Priests lurking in all of the spaghetti-code spreadsheets/simcraft profiles people have been passing around back alleys.
If I were you, I’d take some midrange Mythic raid guild that’s aspiring to Hall of Fame status, and partner up with them. Then get their help to go through and check every bit of data in your models, and from there you could refine the simulator profiles and really perfectly nail down every aspect of the game. If people couldn’t see 15% staring them in the face, I’ll bet there are plenty of opportunities to min-max survivability, raid DPS, and healing throughput 2% at a time by just throwing out all of the low quality “conventional wisdom” that the theorycrafting community has piled up over the years. Before you know it, they’d be rocking 20% or more improved survivability and healing, possibly DPS as well.
Especially if they aren’t uploading logs and letting people pick through all the improvements as you find them, these guys could suddenly show up out of left field and dominate the rankings in the next raid tier
IMO you could be a lot more aggressive about monetizing the site after that too.
Since this thread, I’ve actually leveled my priest and been raiding on it, using exclusively the advice our website spits out, just for the sake of science. Our raid has lived. All of my healing parses (which are a stupid metric but w/e) have been 75%+ for my ilvl, with a few 95%+ in there. So, I still feel good about our simulation model of healers, even if the advice ends up being “off-meta”.
We have talked to a few mythic guilds in the past to try to do something like you mentioned, but haven’t been able to get very far with it. I’d love to see a mythic raiding guild have every member use default AMR builds (they’d do amazing) and be a test case for us. Hard to find people willing to do that, though, even when we offer to tailor some of the output per their input.
