There are other considerations, also. Ranged or melee? Damage or debuff? Using HoTs or DoTs? And so on. While I completely agree with not putting too many spells into a macro, and not creating macros where some spells never get used, there seems to be a misunderstanding here how EQ2 macros work. They do not cast the list of spells top to bottom. They cast the first spell, then the last. Second spell, then last, all the way to the end. Spells should be arranged by recast time in descending, NOT ascending order; if you arrange them in ascending order, you are very likely to have spells/CAs in the macro that never cast as spells closer to the top recover. I check my next-to-the-last spell as primary, so the hotkey does not grey out until that spell casts.
Except you can't queue macros... *Shrug* I've never understood not wanting control over what you cast or the attraction of mashing 1 or 2 buttons over and over and over, but whatever works for people.
There is not a single class in this game that fills 10 hotbars with skills... my troub has every skill she can get, as well as skills from AAs, multiple jcap macros, a MT macro, 5 potions, cosmetics, mounts and familiars - and I still have 2 hotbars completely empty. People fill their hotbars with random crap that clutters it. 10 is enough. I agree with you, was just quoting for context.
Yes, which is why I said this bit: " . . . when you're creating a macro, particularly a DPS macro, there is a lot more to think about than just recast time." Even saying a macro casts first then last is oversimplification. What it really does is cast first available ability and queue the last available ability. It's confusing and counter intuitive. This is why the first thing I talked about in that OP is using the Destroying ability to gain more control over how your macro is executed. By using this method, you effectively force EQ2 to play the macro top to bottom. To me, it's a far more intuitive and controlled situation that way. YMMV. There is absolutely no hard and fast rule about ordering your spells in a macro. Saying that you do it in ascending order of recast or descending order of recast are both equally wrong (at times), and short sighted almost always. For instance, as a Conjuror, Blazing Avatar and Petrify have identical recast times, and if you are simply using an "order of recast" rule, it would equate those two spells. In truth, Petrify should almost never be cast. Note the "almost", and not an absolute, because there are situations where it may be appropriate. I far prefer to simply help people understand their class and abilities, clear up mechanical misunderstanding, teach them situational awareness and then let them create as necessary. It's the whole "give a man a fish, teach a man to fish" argument. I would rather hand out fish hooks.
You're right about the first available ability, but I disagree about the last available... it only looks for the last ability, period, and will not cast if the last is not up. This is why you put the fastest recast time in the last slot.
I think you're right. I think it queues the last ability regardless. It's been so long since I didn't have a macro that ended itself I wasn't as up to date as I should be. This, to me, illustrates even more clearly why it makes the most sense to have the last ability be "Destroying" so that the macro simply executes the first available ability and ends. I think what you're accomplishing by putting a sort of "spam" ability in the last slot is similar, but not quite as efficient. For example, as a Wizard, your cast order is largely built around casting the spell that does the most damage per time spent casting - which has little to do with recast times. In fact, the Wizard spam-able ability Solar Flare is rarely even used.
I use the HO activator instead of Destroying, but that's not a bad idea. Might try that next time. It'd reduce the chat spam in window. As for ordering, it really is about making intelligent decisions and using basic math. Most classes have a lot of spells or CAs that are literally just complete filler to hit during down time. Raw damage with no riders attached to them of consequence. For abilities like these, there's nothing wrong with throwing them in a macro and sorting them by damage per unit of time spent casting. For abilities that need actual degrees of control, it definitely is not a good thing to do. For example, I had a filler macro on my assassin, but I manually managed my abilities that built and consumed Nightblade's Intensity, so that I could more accurately time it with large spike CAs or ascensions.
