Jump to content


Photo

Warning for Gloryrider: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible.


  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 Therya

Therya

    Fudge Muffin Addict

  • Moderators
  • 332 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 02 February 2013 - 10:50 PM

Post: Disc Priest - Mists of Pandaria
User: Gloryrider
Infraction: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible.
Points: 0

Administrative Note:

Message to User:

In the future please don't split a quote into so many blocks. Merge the quotes instead and add your reply at the end.

Original Post:

Gloryrider, lowering the healing of other healers is never a concern for maximising output. If there is too little damage for the other healers to heal, one of them goes DPS.


Obviously if you're 2-healing in a 10-man group and there is a lull in the damage intake, you should just soloheal the whole thing. And when the Druid pops tranq and everyone gets topped, I shouldn't have been healer in the first place...

I understand fully where you're coming from, it's even in my post, right there, that it's something to consider. Especially the DPS gain.
Of course stopping casts lowers your healing done, that goes without explanation. I just disagree with you when you say there's no time whatsoever that you can stop casting or 'interval-cast', because many fights do.If the drop in HPS is worth the gain in mana (because you're healing at insanely high overheal rates) then you should indeed, skip a couple casts. There's enough discussion about this on the subject of the current PW:Solace, no need to reiterate on this further.

And the value of haste is subject to the same rules as crit in these situations since the extra healing you do is pointless, the extra dps you do is not. Just like with crit. And yes, haste > crit for atonement DPS so indeed. Mastery still falls behind but I guess everyone figured that out already :)

However doing that means choosing to not push your HPS to its limit. That means you and I have different aims and hence there is little point in a discussion. (...) Haste is only limited by mana when you are chain cast as much as you possibly can.


As Szeretlek pointed out already as well, you'll need the mana to go with that. Before some decent calculations are done about exactly how much extra mana you spend on filler spells because of a certain amount of haste, there is no point discussing either. You're saying it's your aim to chain cast all the time, but you're not proving that it's even possible to chain cast with those levels of haste.
Having more haste with a limited mana pool will only push your spell selection towards mana-efficient spells that can be continuously cast. If then a huge damage spike comes and you are stuck casting low HPS spells (or high HPS spells, resulting in being out of mana completely afterwards), your raid will be dead sooner than later.

I am afraid you didn't think this through. If overheal is high the incoming damage is low so aegis is being wasted. Aegis only matters when you can be certain it will be absorbed i.e. when you can keep it alive through PoH spam.


...but you can't, I know. But you've never even considered the fact that sometimes the biggest overheal on your crit comes from the raw healing, and that the aegis later gets absorbed. That is a very likely scenario whenever your atonement crits the tank. Even with 100% raw healing overhealed your Aegis will still be absorbed by the next melee hit(s). As it will on raid members with a dot, low raid damage, high raid damage dealt with by cooldowns like Tranquility & Divine Hymn, etc, etc.

I considered aegis and its "overheal" in all theoretical calculations.


It was an honest question, I'm not as mathematically skilled as many (everyone?) here and it wasn't entirely clear. Thanks for confirming.

EDIT: I don't think anyone expects crit to have 100% of it's full value anytime. It would be extremely powerful if it did. The question is what the value is and this question goes for both crit ánd haste still.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users