Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Hamlet

Resto PvE Compendium and General Discussion

421 posts in this topic

I have found with a 12 second glyphed Rejuv that I can get very close to the 5x1 "model" healing. For the fights in ICC so far though, 5x1 isn't necessary and I am finding that the more reactive nature of RR glyph is excellent for helping out on targeted burst type abilities. That said, I definitely agree that it noticeably lowers my ability to counter mass AoE effects like Deathwhisper's frost bolt blasts.

It just irks me that the result on RR might be "ymmv". Because of that, I lean towards having 2x Trees responsible for 2 groups each with the last group containing mostly tanks. I like to think that my strategy will come to the fore once raid damage meets or exceeds the HPS provided by a non-glyphed rejuvenation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was briefly touched on in the itemization thread, but it probably belongs here more than there.

I wonder just how haste we effectively do utilize on a given encounter given simple human reactions (I'd guess maybe a few hundredths of a second on average per spell) and occasional human mistakes where we aren't able to walk and chew gum at the same time and so don't chain cast spells when we could. For example I know a lot of druids slow their casting while moving out of fire.

I've been digging through my own logs trying to figure out a good way to capture this without checking the individual timestamps of spells, but at present it's a lot of effort for something with little impact; it's not going to be nearly enough to affect item choice with how weak crit generally rates; you'd need to be wasting 50% or more of your haste to think about trading an equal ilevel haste item for a crit item. Just from using a Perl script to scan a WoL parse I'd estimate I'm wasting 10% of my haste (10% of haste, not 10% haste) over the course of a high movement encounter (Putricide), throwing out Tear Gas durations. I don't have a way to factor latency out of that, if it has any meaningful impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been digging through my own logs trying to figure out a good way to capture this without checking the individual timestamps of spells, but at present it's a lot of effort for something with little impact;

First, if someone is not casting because of something like moving out of fire - this is irrelevant for the evaluation of haste.

Player A has 0 haste rating, and had to 'move while not casting' 5% of the fight.

Player B has 800 haste rating, and had to 'move while not casting' 5% of the fight.

Both players will lose the same percentage of their total throughput (ignoring heals with CD such as WG from the calculation), if they are casting the rest of the time.

Its true that player B will 'lose' the option to cast more spells than play A, but you could argue the same for any heal boosting stat, such as spellpower - if player B had more spellpower than player A, he would lose more powerful spells.

Second, if you wish to evaluate how much time a player is not casting, how about just look at all spell casts by the player, his haste rating from gear / talents / buffs (can check average uptime of those) and then come up with a number - how much time should it take to cast all those spells. If you divide this number by the total fight length (pick a fight without 'dead time' - for example Northern Beasts or Mimiron are bad, while Twins are good) that should give a good estimation on how much time is lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First, if someone is not casting because of something like moving out of fire - this is irrelevant for the evaluation of haste.

Player A has 0 haste rating, and had to 'move while not casting' 5% of the fight.

Player B has 800 haste rating, and had to 'move while not casting' 5% of the fight.

Both players will lose the same percentage of their total throughput (ignoring heals with CD such as WG from the calculation), if they are casting the rest of the time.

Its true that player B will 'lose' the option to cast more spells than play A, but you could argue the same for any heal boosting stat, such as spellpower - if player B had more spellpower than player A, he would lose more powerful spells.

This is very true, and is part of why this isn't an itemization question; it's a better play question. Player A and B are both wasting spellpower (and crit, any other throughput stat), but only player B is wasting haste. However, if player B had 100 haste rating, he'd have been wasting that, or he had 1000 rating, same thing. Percentage based, not an absolute number. Because they're all throughput stats they're all interconnected. Since we're not trading spellpower for haste in general, it's not a matter of 'what could I better spent those haste itemization points on', it's a matter of 'how far from the optimal play nirvana that we tend to assume am I?'

To put it another way. Every time we overheal or have another healer heal over a HoT, we are wasting spellpower, everytime we overheal with a crit, we're wasting crit. In each of those situations we're also wasting all the other throughput stats. Of these scenarios the 'not pushing buttons fast enough' scenario is the easiest to control. It would be nice to be able to optimize the other two, but they've been around since WoW began and often hinge on making snap predictions about the future and the habits of other healers, and of the person being healed.

There are also cases where you don't want to be chain casting, and in these cases you're 'wasting' haste, but don't really care. It's important to parse those out. It ends up being a somewhat small set of cases where haste waste is significant but a lot of decisions we make for spec, gearing, and suchlike are based around the highest healing required cases, even if they're rare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our healing prevents that sub 30% bracket if said druid has a definitive understanding of the fight mechanics. I won't disagree that some sniping is inevitable with this style. However, our job is to mitigate damage and keep people out of that danger area and doing that results in a fairly aggressive healing style when done correctly. This is the reason you will see some druids top meters regardless, even if the fight is not a Val'kyr Twins type scenario. They see the damage before it happens and have already provided the proactive defense to meet it. So, that when it happens, those same druids are pulling out tools like Swiftmend/Nourish as opposed to casting Rejuvenation/Regrowth (because those people that took damage had HoTs on them before it even hit).

It is less tangible in terms of "life-saving" measure compared to what pretty much every other class does. But to call it less valuable seems unfair to me. I will concede that it is not hard to be a mediocre or even "good" druid. Being an exceptional druid requires anticipation, awareness, and a very strong fundamental understanding of the proper tool for the job, both before and after the damage has occurred.

QFT. An amazing summary of why I think a lot of Druids do less then they could to improve the chances of success on encounters where the stereotypical Druid says, "Oh, I'm sorry, this isn't a fight where I'm supposed to do well." No, you shouldn't continue to 5x1 even though everyone is at full health and you know there is no AOE attack coming (I've run with far too many healers like this). Just because there isn't a steady damage aura doesn't mean we don't have some of the strongest tools in the game to keep someone alive, all backed by our ability to cover most of the raid or to target a group with our HOTs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have found with a 12 second glyphed Rejuv that I can get very close to the 5x1 "model" healing. For the fights in ICC so far though, 5x1 isn't necessary and I am finding that the more reactive nature of RR glyph is excellent for helping out on targeted burst type abilities. That said, I definitely agree that it noticeably lowers my ability to counter mass AoE effects like Deathwhisper's frost bolt blasts.

It just irks me that the result on RR might be "ymmv". Because of that, I lean towards having 2x Trees responsible for 2 groups each with the last group containing mostly tanks. I like to think that my strategy will come to the fore once raid damage meets or exceeds the HPS provided by a non-glyphed rejuvenation.

I have found this glyph to be greatly useful in my 10 man raids, simply because there arn't that many people to heal and I can blanket the entire raid with Rejuvenation even with the reduced duration, thus more heals on entire raid. However when healing in 25 man I saw a drastic reduction in my heals with this. Basically in healing intense fights Resto druids really want to blanket the rejuvenation as well as keep WG up. (I suppose it varies on personal playing type but this is what I have found to be most successful.) So in my 25 man raids I couldn't keep Rejuv on as many people at once and was not healing to my full extent.

Final Decision:

I made two separate healing specs, one for 10 man raids where I did use this glyph and am greatly pleased with it, and one for 25 man raids where I replace this glyph with Glyph of Rejuvenation. there are a few other differences but really the main difference is this glyph and I have had great success

---------------------------------------------------------

Arria

<Sacellum>

Nordrassil

Visit my website:

www.TheRestoraionDruid.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blood-Queen Lana'thel is a great place to understand the pros and cons of Rapid Rejuv. Ultimately, I think I supports what I've been saying the whole time that it's surprisingly hard to craft a situation where RR is truly helps your raid healing.

The important thing is that it has a heavy raid damage aura (4500/tick) which ticks every 2 seconds. 2 ticks is exactly the tick rate of a Rapid Rejuvation for a haste-capped Druid (50% total haste).

In 10-man, RR is great. It's a 12s HoT, meaning that the timing is rather perfect for straight 5x1 spam. (Bloodlust makes things a bit awkward, though). Ok, so there, we use it, great.

But what about in 25? People will definitely bring 2 Trees. And now you can't cover 25 people if both use RR. You can't even cover 23 non-tanks if you plan to use any other spells. Two Trees in our first raid today (we run two 25-mans) wound up just having one person use the glyph so they could split up 2 groups and 3 groups. On balance, I'd guess that 2 using RR is probably better--but it's not much better. I could easily see changing my mind on this after doing the 25-man fight myself. One of the most dangerous parts of the fight is the fear/movement when she takes off--and as many longer-durations HoT's as possible might be handy for that.

The point to all this is that even when the situation is absolutely perfectly tailored to a 2s HoT--it's very hard to voluntarily cut down on the number of HoT's you can maintain at once, when the whole raid is taking damage. So what if you have two Trees without the Glyph? Overlapping HoT's are still perfectly good. Not as bad as the holes you have if both use the Glyph, at any rate.

RR will shine when there are simply too few targets to heal to make use of spread HoT's (Saurfang). I think these situations where the majority of a 25-man raid are just not taking any damage are rare. And at other times, the Glyph generally has ups and downs, but never makes a convincing case that it's a strong overall winner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, RR was terrible for Queen (for us). We both dumped it and it's basically the first fight where I pretty much textbooked 5x1. We talk about 5x1 a lot, but in practice I don't think people really actually do it as much as they think. The only times I broke off was to innervate myself and to mend if it was necessary. Even then I maintained WG on CD. Depending how many healers you run (we ran 6), I felt that WG to the melee on CD for Revitalize was very important from a damage standpoint. The fight is extremely fun, I am sure you will all enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, did only a few pulls on 25 which went sorta OK but not a kill. I don't see the downside of RR on the ground phase (Carebear, if you don't mind elaborating on why you found it counterproductive). Thing is, not all raid heals are created equal and not all raid groups take the same amount of damage. For the 4.5K/2s aura I'll take 4 group coverage with RR + WG over the overlapping hots of 2 non-RR druids. I can see how going 1 with and 1 without would work out since though since it means the melee can get the weaker rejuvs which tends to suffice for them.

To be fair on normal the aura itself isn't really the issue, it's only when you pair it with the added damage of the air phase that makes it meaningful. Was wondering, has anyone tried a PvP trinket to break the fears?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And at other times, the Glyph generally has ups and downs, but never makes a convincing case that it's a strong overall winner.

I am a big fan of the RR glyph. I slot it in almost every fight (except heroic Anub 25). On average, RR should never lose you HPS in a 25 man raid unless it's a weird fight which punishes faster hots in some way, or you outgear the fight and the extra HPS is going into overhealing.

What you lose is having hots on more people, which I guess can translate into a loss of raid stability (you may not be able to do a clutch swiftmend on someone, or a tick may not save someone). What you gain is more HPS on telegraphed targets. There are a lot of telegraphed targets in raids: tanks, any fight in the Plague wing of IC will have them on raid, etc. You also gain more HPS on targets you do rejuvs on.

I would say the more you know about the targeted damage pattern in advance, the more valuable the RR glyph becomes. If the damage is an aura, you gain nothing, if the damage is unpredictable, RR forces you to commit and the price of a wrong guess is higher (higher variance is bad for stability). As the damage becomes more targeted and/or predictable, RR glyph should win out over unglyphed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it really depends on how you set up healing. For us it was definitely easier to have two druids going normal rejuvenation on 15 ranged guys (technically only 14 ranged plus one melee) while tossing WG on melee. It's not that rejuvenation wouldn't work on melee also, it's that chain heals, holy light glyphs etc. don't really work on ranged.

I tried 10-man without RR (figuring I'd get a bit more time for other spell casts), the results weren't pretty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(Carebear, if you don't mind elaborating on why you found it counterproductive). Thing is, not all raid heals are created equal and not all raid groups take the same amount of damage. For the 4.5K/2s aura I'll take 4 group coverage with RR + WG over the overlapping hots of 2 non-RR druids. I can see how going 1 with and 1 without would work out since though since it means the melee can get the weaker rejuvs which tends to suffice for them.

To be fair on normal the aura itself isn't really the issue, it's only when you pair it with the added damage of the air phase that makes it meaningful. Was wondering, has anyone tried a PvP trinket to break the fears?

Sure.

I think some of it does come down to style but this was how I determined I was displeased with the glyph. (I mentioned to Melador on druid chat "Hey I don't like RR on this" before I could elaborate he had concurred so I didn't get into then.)

1) 4.5k aura every 2 seconds is less than you think it is. I found that splitting with RR those people needed essentially no more healing. This isn't a bad thing, but I think post-Anuburak I have found a healthier view point of keeping people out of danger, but not at full HP. At no point did I find that keeping people on Queen at say 85% was detrimental compared to keeping them at 100%.

2) You cannot really run a perfectly tight 5x1 with RR. You can run a 10x1 obviously, but 5x1 starts putting you behind on globals. (At least it did for me and I sit with a ping around 40-200ms depending on server lag.) Factor in that my mana consumption felt worse for putting out heals on less people (not less HPS to be fair, just less coverage). I definitely needed my own innervate x2 (each cast putting me further behind on maintaining a 5x1 then if someone needed a swiftmend or NS for whatever reason I am even further behind and it's possible there is no RJ on the person I need to swiftmend -- now even further behind or that person might die), a tide, and a mana pot. I could make gear/meta exchanges, but again my question was why? Then I'm lowering my spellpower and still covering less people all in this effort to keep them completely topped.

3) Running 2x normal rejuv added a lot of flexibility. What if I got the Jaraxxus style fire and I had to run out and this put me OOR on any of the 10 people I was maintaining with RR and they were due for it to be refreshed at the time I was OOR? Now I am still yet further behind.

4) Depending on your strat there are various ways to do the fight.

- 5 healers and no one suiciding.

- 6 healers and no one suiciding.

- 5-6 healers with suicides.

We used 6 healers, no suicides. Which means when we killed her in 5:13 (which could have been a tad cleaner execution wise, no doubt) we were strapped. People were starting to get MC'd. So I felt with juggling our healing role, what can I do to help DPS? I can maintain Revitalize on the people who really do see a DPS gain. (Ferals, followed by DKs, followed by Rogues). This pushes me even more to want to use WG on cooldown. For the reasons above with RR I found it nearly impossible to keep a strict 5x1 with other factors -- so if I abandoned the RR application that person is hotless, but if I do it and sacrifice using the WG then we're missing a small (but not entirely negligible) DPS increase to maintain someone at 100% HP and the question remains -- why?

5) The fight lends itself toward a good druid with good ping landing swiftmends in times of need. I wanted the ability to do that without falling behind.

6) Finally, again this goes to your strat. We used 6 healers. Why use 2 people to maintain 20 people at 100% HP thereby theoretically leaving 5 people for the remaining 4 healers? Why keep 20 people nearly full when we can keep 25 absolutely safe (ready for swiftmends if needed, etc) with room to spare on globals/room for other healers to heal as well?

Again, this depends on style, your raid group, your strat. I will not say RR is universally awful for the fight, that would be ridiculous. I just didn't feel like it brought anything significant to the table other than a headache if the rotation fell behind/minor mana issues even when you didn't. I started at Group 1 with normal RJ, Melador at Group 5. For the most part I could RJ group 1/WG centered on our feral, RJ group 2/WG centered on our feral, 3 or so people in group 3 + any 2 people who felt lower than they should be/WG again. I had room to spare if I needed (running out for flames, during the airphase having a ton of RJs up with the ability to mend or Nourish patch with at least one HoT already in place. Coming out of the air phase all of the people I was watching were definitely hotted and unaffected by the fact that I might have gone outside my assignment for a NS/Mend on someone who took a large hit (feared through fire, or anything of that nature).

I hope this was the type of explanation you were looking for. We didn't PVP trinket. We had 3 tremors, the other people dealt without having it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is quite the insight, thank you. I'm not sure the Anub analogy holds, seeing as damage in Anub depends on current HP, and in addition I see a large incentive to keep the raid at 100% or close to it - the air phase.

I'm guessing you falling behind on 5x1 is a result of being over the haste cap. This isn't much of a concern if that's the case, while healing is a bit uneven it's not significantly so. If you're casting non-stop then RR won't increase your mana usage, and I somewhat doubt you were pausing on purpose on this fight :)

I guess your basic assumption is that RR increases the overhealing you do. You can't ignore the fact that the incoming damage a player takes is higher than unglyphed rejuv's output (or a glyped one, for that matter). Holes can be covered by other healers, no doubt, but this is more of a ffa raid heal assignment, which brings me to...

The idea of putting 2 non-RRed druids on the 15 or so ranged sounds interesting although the excess healing is quite high. I find it appealing for air-phase handling mostly, since the melee classes tend to be more resilient to incoming damage (DPS warriors aside).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd expect RR to be about perfect (very little underheal or overheal) for an unbitten person's aura. Say 1800 to 2000 DPS from the aura (after partial resists), and 1500-1800 HPS from Rejuv (before 4t9 procs).

Once a DPS has been bitten, I'd expect their self heals (1500 HPS?) to take care of most of the aura. I'd think you could happily cover them with Regrowth. That gives you even more SM and Nourish+1 opportunities, and you still have RR available as a weaker oh-crap button.

With unglyphed Rejuv and two trees, some people will have two Rejuvs (= overhealing for Aura), and the ones with only one Rejuv will be losing health at a good pace.

Using Regrowth instead of Rejuv on DPS vampires means they don't get Revitalize, but with the amount of movement in the fight, I wouldn't expect any ranged DPS to have mana issues. You'd still use Rj on healers, and WG would more than cover melee's aura damage.

I have not done the fight. It is certainly possible I'm not understanding some mechanic properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right we didn't ignore the melee again for Revitalize reasons, so we rolled on 25 rather than 15. Especially if you get a flame creep in the melee that's going to run out and others might take some damage the extra protection was not bad. I certainly wasn't pausing, but could feel a mana difference. I could just be psychotic, that's entirely possible.

Anub was an extreme example and not necessarily appropriate, the fact remains that people need to be safe, but not healed to full consistently (or overhealed as you pointed out). It really does come down to strat/style. Normal RJ simply provides more control on more people and being that I'm a control freak it's just more appealing to me. We didn't find excess healing to be high honestly (Queen kill parse). I mean when you figure I can easily do 60%+ in overheal on RJ in a given fight, 40% seems fine - it is on par with my Twins HPS and overheal and we are mostly in agreement that Twins does not benefit from RR. Twins could theoretically have more of a someone gets gibbed factor compared to Queen as well (in my opinion).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had similar experiences with RR as carebare, except from a primarily 10-man perspective. There is a lot more crossover, and assignments are generally far less defined, in healing 10s than 25s from my experience. Attempting to 5x1 locks up all of your GCDs and doesn't allow for movement, Swiftmends or spot healing without letting the cycle drop. It felt a lot more natural having the extra duration on the Rejuvs without RR, which gave the extra freedom to drop a heal on a tank on a bad avoidance run or someone who just got biten and not worry about letting Rejuvs fall.

My overall impression of RR has gone from "Manditory" when it released to "Just like the rest" currently. As an aside, I think that it is fantastic that we aren't in a "You're a Resto Druid, use glyphs A, B and C." situation. We're able to pick and choose from A, B, C, D, E and F. And that choice depends on your own personal style and your overall group makeup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twins could theoretically have more of a someone gets gibbed factor compared to Queen as well (in my opinion).

This seems like a key point on the fight which may not be apparent when reading strats versus doing the fight. There really isn't much spike damage on Blood Queen despite the number of abilities she possesses. Both Pact of the Darkfallen and Swarming Shadows give you a 1.5-3s warning of who they're being targeted on before they start doing damage, with both being on fairly predictable timers, and they do not both come out at the same time (or at least on the same person), that we ever saw, meaning that nobody is going to take more than aura + 10k damage at any given time. There are very few ways for many sources of damage to all converge on one person to gib them unless serious mistakes are made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, nobody takes dangerous damage at Twins unless they plow orbs in the first place. Those same people will stand in the purple fire or forget to move for Pact at Queen. I'd been thinking of Queen as more dangerous to random raid members overall (but that might only be because it's new).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really think it is the new vs. old factor comparison wise. Twins still has that last element of possible danger when say Light Vortex is coming and people are gunning for a color change and RNG wrecks them with a ton of light orbs floating all around the portal. The largest hurdle for us on Queen was the hey now everyone is unfeared, no really please spread out. The ground phase did not pose a serious threat to anyone at any point. Again, we 6 healed and I'm sure that had something to do with it. We'll probably drop to 5 healers next time I'd imagine, we just try to keep the same people for the full clear to avoid locking people unnecessarily. On normal mode with badges being so needed the content is not difficult enough to warrant rotating people in/out and slicing their badge income.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly directed at Hamlet... I know theres a discussion ongoing as to the huge impact Revitalize has on raids. Do you know of any math, or have any that could help analyze the quantity of revitalize procs on a druid using Rapid Rejuv versus without?

We were having a debate as to the theoretical maxing of revitalize procs on the Queen fight. Which would maximize the procs in a 25man raid? Two druids with Rapid Rejuv or Two druids without? Would a split of one with, one without be better? Not even quite sure how to phrase the question better, but basically i'm asking if anyones determined the uptime of Revitalize (or quantity of procs whatever) with the two Rejuv approachs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revitalize proc chances are constant by tick, so assuming you cast the same number of Rejuvenations, you'll get the same number of expected tics, with or without the glyph. You'd just have more opportunity for ticks on individual people with RR since you'd be recasting Rejuvenation on them more often. Since some classes benefit more from Revitalize than others, RR would likely give you slightly more DPS if that was your main goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there anyone else using regrowth as their primary heal? It seems to go against the trend, but there are several reasons that I believe support it's use.

1. When a reactive heal is needed, you have an instant 'big' tick in roughly 1 second, as opposed to 2 seconds with rejuv. Cast time is not much more than Nourish, likely less than .15 different if NG is procced, which is often the case when blanketing the raid with Regrowth.

2. A HoT is left ticking for a MUCH longer period of time (27 seconds vs roughly 11 seconds on my RR Rejuv, or 8 seconds of a LB). This can help mitigate a lot of 'small' raid damage, such as the Abom's aura on Putricide

3. Living Seed further mitigates damage to the raid. My parses show it from being anywhere from 4% to 8% of my effective heals, depending on the fight.

4. Clipping your Regrowth with Glyph of Regrowth provides even more reactive healing, and enhances your ticking HoT.

5. HPM efficiency is not far behind Rejuventation. In my case, under 5%.

6. It is more likely that a HoT will be rolling on any targets that may need Swiftmend.

Downsides:

1. It costs a hell of a lot more mana, as casting Regrowth every GCD yields roughly -1000mp5 over a 5x1 if sustained. I currently take advantage of every Blue slot with SP/SPI, as the extra MP5 is necessary. If I am purely spamming regrowth, self-innervating is absolutely required, and I will likely need Mana Tide as well. Hymn is typically saved as a last resort, as the DPS loss isn't ideal. Mana usage can be situationally controlled by going back to a standard Rejuv/LB spam. My Meta returns mana, and my Cloak is enchanted with Darkweave. I could further enchant everything with Spirit instead of SP, but my modeling shows that the SP drop would be too much.

2. Other healers all think you're on crack.

I still do fill in with rejuvenation and WG, and cast LB on the tank with spare GCDs. In 25 mans, raw throughput is marginally increased, but in 10 mans, switching to Regrowth for healing has pushed my throughput through the roof. Blood Queen 10 man yielded roughly 11k HPS with regrowth as my primary heal. I would reactively heal with Regrowth, while rolling out rejuvs when there was no reactive healing to be done as well as filling in with WG. In this case, the other two healers were a Shammy and Paladin.

I would also note that the Shammy has noticed a drop in throughput from Chainheal after I switched to Regrowth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regrowth doesn't work with Revitalize, you can't move while casting it, and our tier bonuses don't work with it. Even matching Rejuv in throughput isn't enough for a candidate primary heal, it must also match all the other advantages Rejuv offers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a big fan of RR most of the time. One of the great things about druid raid healing is we're sort of uniquely not dependant on targets being clumped together to be effective. It would always depend on your comp, but even though revitalize is mostly only a dps boost for melee classes we're still going to get favored to heal ranged that have to spread out over melee because things like chain heal, CoH and glyph of HL. That makes it really likely that the best use of us is being assigned to about 10 people who are forced to stay spread out and at range (which seems to be a somewhat popular mechanic these days).

The only situation where I would not use it is if the raid healing was consistent with regular rejuv and I was going to take responsibility for 15+ people (like regular twins) or if for some reason the fight mechanics made glyph of rejuvenation really powerful (no fights I can think of right now, maybe some anub strats).

@Carebare

In defense of RR, there're a few of logical fallacies in the complaints you listed about it for Blood Queen.

There's nothing about RR that particularly makes 5x1 spam more or less doable. It doesn't affect the GCD. The falling behind on the rotation you describe happens without the glyph as well. Perhaps you were just more conscious of it because you were really trying to WG the melee as often as possible. Realistically, it may be better to take responsibility for only rejuving 9 people with RR, just as 13-14 people is all rejuv realistically stays up on without RR (assuming WG whenever you can of course). Similarly, it doesn't affect mana consumption for a 5x1 rotation, assuming you're still casting as fast as you can all the time in either situation.

I think it's worth pointing out that if you fall behind and have to slip a swiftmend in there rejuv will fall off a person, but with RR the length between your rejuv ticks with a skipped GCD inbetween is still only 3 seconds, just as a rejuv without RR would be. If that's a problem, dropping RR shouldn't really fix it.

It sounds like for a well geared tree RR with 100% uptime is excessive for blood queen. So if you're using 2 trees to do nearly all your aura healing it is probably better to play it how you guys did, but I expect that if you're just running 1 tree RR covering the range with WG and another raid healing class on melee works better. As you said, raid strat and comp dictate a lot. It's valuable to have that versatility to work with different other classes.

Especially with 2 druids, I'd argue that a potential "someone gets gibbed factor" is the sort of thing that really favors RR. You'll still expect to have rejuv up on most the dps for swiftmends (a few less at any given time, randomly distributed) but people don't often die to that stuff if there's a healer who can respond to it right away anyhow (either way a quick nourish/regrowth or such is going to keep the person up) but if you can't get to it right away the RR rejuv is doing 150% as much hps and ticking faster until you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing about RR that particularly makes 5x1 spam more or less doable. It doesn't affect the GCD. The falling behind on the rotation you describe happens without the glyph as well. Perhaps you were just more conscious of it because you were really trying to WG the melee as often as possible. Realistically, it may be better to take responsibility for only rejuving 9 people with RR, just as 13-14 people is all rejuv realistically stays up on without RR (assuming WG whenever you can of course). Similarly, it doesn't affect mana consumption for a 5x1 rotation, assuming you're still casting as fast as you can all the time in either situation.

I don't really agree with this...

1. With RR your Rejuv should be around 12-13 seconds. Covering 9-10 targets that gives you 2-4 'free' GCDs assuming a good latency. Without RR your Rejuv is 18 seconds. Covering 13-14 targets (your estimate) that gives you 4-5 'free' GCDs assuming a good latency. +0-3 GCD

2. Like Carebare I run with another druid, neither of us have RR at the moment. So we can cover 13-14 targets each. or 26-28 of a 25man group. with RR that number would be reduced to 9-10 targets each or 18-20 of a 25m group. This means there are 5-7 targets without any rejuv.

This does several things:

a) I can ALWAYS swiftmend a target. Even if I don't have a HoT on them the other druid would so SM is always an option for a big hit instantly.

b) There are now 5-7 targets that need picked up by another healer. In either case I am going to be GCD locked (as you stated still casting as fast as I can), with SM or WGs being tossed in my 'free GCDs' slots.

c) Those 5-7 targets are now eating up someone elses manapool.

E.g.

Lets say for the sake of this example, that we have TreeA with a 12s RR Rejuv and that 10 Rejuv, +2 WG cost 2000 mana,

Lets also say that we have TreeB with a 18s Rejuv and that 15 Rejuc, + 3 WG costs 3000 mana

After 3 minutes (180 seconds) the RR Rejuv cycle would have been repeated 15 times (180s/12s) and cost that person

30k mana. After 3 minutes (180 seconds) the Normal Rejuv cycle would have been repeated 10 times (180s/18s) and cost that person 30k mana. Everything is equal, between the two druids, right? Except for there are 5-7 targets that some other healer has had to cover because I couldn't as TreeA. So where it didn't hurt TreeA's mana at all to use RR, it did hurt the overall manapool of the healers in the raid.

I started at Group 1 with normal RJ, Melador at Group 5. For the most part I could RJ group 1/WG centered on our feral, RJ group 2/WG centered on our feral, 3 or so people in group 3 + any 2 people who felt lower than they should be/WG again. I had room to spare if I needed (running out for flames, during the airphase having a ton of RJs up with the ability to mend or Nourish patch with at least one HoT already in place.

Carebare, I'm curious of how you do your 'centered on our feral' part. I do something very similar with my WG only on a warrior, although your point of ferals/dks getting more out of revitalize may have me changing it. I only pick our fury warrior because he, for the most part, is aware enough not to fail on things.

Anyways, do you just target your feral and hit WG (mouseover/target+keybind) or do you have it macro'd? Currently I have a focus macro made for my WG that will cast it on anyone I have focused. (Bound to Q) and then my normal WG spell (Bound to 6) for when I need my WG to go somewhere else (A cluster of ranged for example). My macro just seems somewhat ... clunky at times, and if he moves out of range it won't cast so I've been trying to work a more effective way to do that piece of my 5x1 rotation especially on fights where I need it (BQ /Putricide P3)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.