Collection of Macros by Maria Nyan

[Myon88]

The sort of metagame behind constructing crafting rotations is quite interesting to me, and I was wondering if anyone else took a more analytical approach toward determining what the optimal rotation for a given situation is.

Take these macros (found in the OP) for 2-3star using MuMe for example,




It seems like the 'limit' at current gear levels for a macro like this is 11 touches for 2star and 10 for 3star (since you have to change one hasty to a CSII). They're pretty good (and I use them myself), but I'm never satisfied and I'm always wondering if there's a better rotation hiding out there that allows for 12 or even 13 touches. And it made me curious about what the best approach to take for finding those rotations was.

The way I see it, crafting rotations are basically constrained by how many durability regeneration skills you're able to fit in, since that combined with the starting durability controls how many touches and synthesis actions you're able to perform.

In the 2star rotation for example, WN2 (when used efficiently) and MM2 are effectively 100 extra durability in total, which combined with the starting 70 means you have a bank of 17 durability reducing actions total. And you can see that in the rotation these are split into 12 touches (11 + Byregots) and 5 synthesis actions (MuMe, PbP, CSII x 3).

So basically you can see that the only way to fit extra touches into there would be,
1. Find a way to complete the item in 4 or less synthesis actions, which hints at the next craftsmanship breakpoint and/or a different approach (brand/name skills, etc)
2. Use durability regeneration skills that restore 110 or more durability, which becomes a simple addition problem (MM2 + Manip + WN1? for example), which hints at the next CP breakpoint to fit those in
3. Some combination of the above
4. And of course, you could find a macro that uses the same number of actions, but somehow combines them more effectively for more quality gains, that's a possibility too

Anyway, I was just a little interested in the analytical process of proving that a rotation is the most efficient one. Those of you who've been here for some time have no doubt thought about these things.