Black Mage Sanctuary - A Guide to DPS

[zuzu-bq]

Wasn't Blizzard III openner one of the few first openners to show up when HW came to keep the Thunder dot similarity with ARR openner? And soon everyone realized its potency per second was low. Also I can only see openning on a Blizzard Spell to Sharpcast Thunder fair if you gotta open without Convert's extra GCDs (And RS consequently). To line up GCDs with something and get the Thundercloud's Thunder III potency in a non-burst and/or non-movement heavy scenario. Am I wrong?

Other than that I have a question. I always did safter rotations as a BLM (prioritizing mobility over damage even on fights I had full knowledge of) but now that I decided to raid as one for next patch I'm risking other GCD orders to increase my dps. Also started gettin more used to the Flare openner. So, to do the Flare openner while I'm dancing from UI3 to AF3, should I Sharpcast the Fire cast or a Thunder before redoing it mid-combat when my Cooldowns are back lined up.

[Waliel]

And if Person B crits on everything they will definitely outpace Person A who is solely relying on their burst and party support to punch in their numbers.

Let's not go there, as you can win with anything that looks like an opener if you crit everything.

[StouterTaru]

Wasn't Blizzard III openner one of the few first openners to show up when HW came to keep the Thunder dot similarity with ARR openner? And soon everyone realized its potency per second was low.

It came out as a little better if you got a TC proc, and worse if you didn't get the proc.

The biggest reason it went away was DRG using litany pre-pull, and NIN opening with TA. Some parties it's worth doing, some it's worth holding them for a few GCDs. If your setup is one of the latter, that's when you'll be doing better with a B3 opener.

[FunkyBunch]

Wasn't Blizzard III openner one of the few first openners to show up when HW came to keep the Thunder dot similarity with ARR openner? And soon everyone realized its potency per second was low. Also I can only see openning on a Blizzard Spell to Sharpcast Thunder fair if you gotta open without Convert's extra GCDs (And RS consequently). To line up GCDs with something and get the Thundercloud's Thunder III potency in a non-burst and/or non-movement heavy scenario. Am I wrong?

The B3 opener is because it guarantees you can do it without the PIE buff. You may not have enough PIE (depending on race) to do the F3 opener without some kind PIE buff. At least that's my recollection.
It's also easier to weave your oGCD buffs with. But it is slightly lower potency.
I'm rusty with BLM so I'm not up on the new openers that 1100 SS +12s AF can give you.

[Rakith]

Hi,
could you please tell me the advantage of the "Flare" opener ? I never use flare in my opener, i always use conversion and swiftcast to add 2 Fire IV to my rotation.
thansk

[zuzu-bq]

Hi,
could you please tell me the advantage of the "Flare" opener ? I never use flare in my opener, i always use conversion and swiftcast to add 2 Fire IV to my rotation.
thansk

You will always have mana to cast something after you go Umbral. In some cases of two targets the pps increases drasticly (Double Faust, Vortexer and Swindler together and other cases) and if the Fire procs, the total potency of the openner becomes really high. Aikaal explains it better on his openner video in case you want to watch it, links are up on Openning Thread.

[Lavitz_]

Hi,
could you please tell me the advantage of the "Flare" opener ?...

You will always have mana to cast something after you go Umbral...

Flare opener is outdated, it's only better on two targets. You can cast Thunder after Blizzard 3 using a 6 Fire IV opener even as a Duskwight Elezen (2nd lowest race PIE) as long as there's PIE bonus in party.

Sharp>Quelling>LL>F1>Enochian>F3P>RS+Potion>F4>F4>F4>F1>Swift>F4>Convert>F4>F3P>F4>B3>T1>B4

Depending on your latency you might need to use RS after Enochian if Fire 3 starts casting instead of the proc going off, but if you can get away with using it after the Fire 3 proc, it's better in my opinion. With enough Spell Speed, all your Fire IVs and the 40% chance Fire proc land under Raging Strikes and if you get a proc, use it before Potion runs out so it gets buffed by Potion.

video of opener

Namine is right about 4 Fire IVs in a row, it's perfectly doable under Ley Lines even with the 0.5s delay from Swiftcast, so it would be a PPS gain with a proc if the fight allows it.

[zuzu-bq]

Sharp>Quelling>LL>F1>Enochian>F3P>RS+Potion>F4>F4>F4>F1>Swift>F4>Convert>F4>F3P>F4>B3>T1>B4

I did that the other day and was wondering if it was viable. But I'm pretty bad calculating pps (even when its that easy) and usually try out or wait people to calculate. I like that, and makes a lot more sense too, even having less mobility than the old Fire IV openner. And about Spellspeed, any geared BLM should be able to have enough to 4 Fire IV nowadays.

[Garotte14]

Just to Echo what a few others have said:

Yes, Flare opener is outdated. It was viable in 3.0 because of the 10s AF and the low Spell Speed. Now, the only time it would be beneficial, would be on multiple targets as others have said.

Also, I've started using the opener where you cast 4 Fire IVs in a row on fights where I know I won't be moving during the opener. It is definitely a very potent opener and incredibly strong if you get the second proc. I would still suggest using the standard one if there is a chance you will have to move during your opener. But if you know you're good for the first 30s, I highly suggest using it. Here are both openers with the differences:

Use if you will not have to move
SC > QS > LL > Fire > Enochian + Raging Strikes > F3P > Potion > Fire IVx2 > Fire(no proc) > Fire IV > SC > Fire IV + Convert > Fire IVx2 > Blizzard III > T1 > Blizzard IV.

SC > QS > LL > Fire > Enochian + Raging Strikes > F3P > Potion > Fire IVx2 > Fire(procs) > Fire IV > F3P + SC > Fire IV + Convert > Fire IVx2 > Blizzard III > Thunder > Blizzard IV.

Use if there is potential movement
SC > QS > LL > Fire > Enochian + Raging Strikes > F3P > Potion > Fire IVx3 > Fire(no proc) > SC > Fire IV + Convert > Fire IVx2 > Blizzard III > T1 > Blizzard IV.

SC > QS > LL > Fire > Enochian + Raging Strikes > F3P > Potion > Fire IVx3 > Fire(procs) > SC > Fire IV + Convert > Fire IVx2 > Blizzard III > Thunder > Blizzard IV.

The PPS between both openers where you don't get the proc are in fact identical. The first is riskier because you'll cast Fire IVx4 w/o refreshing AF. It is doable but definitely not worth losing AF if you get targeted by an AoE.

However, if you do get the proc, you can weave both Swiftcast and Convert under instant casts. This greatly increases PPS.

[Waliel]

Yes, Flare opener is outdated. It was viable in 3.0 because of the 10s AF and the low Spell Speed. Now, the only time it would be beneficial, would be on multiple targets as others have said.

It may technically be outdated, but will 45 or so potency difference between Flare and F4 in the opener actually matter at all? Other than min/max, of course.

Use if you will not have to move
SC > QS > LL > Fire > Enochian + Raging Strikes > F3P > Potion > Fire IVx2 > Fire(no proc) > Fire IV > SC > Fire IV + Convert > Fire IVx2 > Blizzard III > T1 > Blizzard IV.

Use if there is potential movement
SC > QS > LL > Fire > Enochian + Raging Strikes > F3P > Potion > Fire IVx3 > Fire(no proc) > SC > Fire IV + Convert > Fire IVx2 > Blizzard III > T1 > Blizzard IV.

I may have become stupid in the time I haven't played this game, but shouldn't the PPS be identical between those two?