Some interesting numbers on 4.0 BLM

[Waliel]

The 4.0 rotation is better on paper, you must modify it to suit your needs for the duration of your next AF.

My papers still show 4x being better than 6x with the upcoming changes. Only time this is not true is when you can't cast Foul during ice.

[jamvng]

My papers still show 4x being better than 6x with the upcoming changes. Only time this is not true is when you can't cast Foul during ice.

That's because you are including Foul (which skews the PPS on 3.0 because it's a shorter rotation). # of Fouls do not change regardless of which rotation you do. You will always get the same amount. If you take away Foul, 4.0 > 3.0.

[Galvuu]

That's because you are including Foul (which skews the PPS on 3.0 because it's a shorter rotation). # of Fouls do not change regardless of which rotation you do. You will always get the same amount. If you take away Foul, 4.0 > 3.0.

This argument is flawed. I have a lengthy description as to why in the main Black Mage thread.
The bottom line is that Foul positioning in the rotation has an inherent cost, and this "let's just calculate the contribution apart" ignores it entirely.
Since neither the 3.X or 4.0 rotation lasts exactly 30s when you account for Foul in UI, you can't just separate it like that.

EDIT: though honestly it's not that important because it turns out the optimal solution ends up being something along the lines of "do 4.0 if you B4 in UI" which, well, you'd obviously do anyway. Also, the 3.X rotation people compare doesn't have two spells in UI (which it must). That's part of the implied premise that Foul will always magically end up there, which isn't really the case (especially for 3.X, you're bound to run out of Fouls).

[jamvng]

EDIT: though honestly it's not that important because it turns out the optimal solution ends up being something along the lines of "do 4.0 if you B4 in UI" which, well, you'd obviously do anyway. Also, the 3.X rotation people compare doesn't have two spells in UI (which it must). That's part of the implied premise that Foul will always magically end up there, which isn't really the case (especially for 3.X, you're bound to run out of Fouls).

I understand that it is better to cast Foul in UI. As such I can see the merits of using 3.x rotation there so that you are not forced to use Foul in AF during 4.0 rotation or worse, lose the Foul stack. But the same thing is true for if you do too many 3.x rotations and/or don't get enough procs to extend 3.x rotation, and end up not being able to Foul in UI.

[Galvuu]

I understand that it is better to cast Foul in UI. As such I can see the merits of using 3.x rotation there so that you are not forced to use Foul in AF during 4.0 rotation or worse, lose the Foul stack. But the same thing is true for if you do too many 3.x rotations and/or don't get enough procs to extend 3.x rotation, and end up not being able to Foul in UI.

Yes, exactly. Sorry, this discussion ended up spreading between the two threads.
The idea will be, with the 60second Triple, that when you have triple you go 4.0 (since you'll get more AF leniency due to Triple making casts shorter and you getting enhanced mobility), and otherwise you do 3.X.
This means that whenever you'll have Foul up for UI, you 3.X, and then when you start catching up to the Foul clock, you go B4 into the 4.0 rotation, which you can line up with Triple to get rid of its disadvantages.
The ideal solution alternates between both rotations