Jump to content


Photo

Restoration WotLK Talent Preview / Discussion


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
653 replies to this topic

#21 Benita

Benita

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 262 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 09:13 AM

Was just about to edit that, now my mistake will be known to mankind for all of eternity because of Norfair :(

Back to business, could anyone verify whether Replenish would proc off a Rank 1 Rejuv?

Also, I feel that a lot of good priests have become lazier and more dependent on CoH after it was introduced. I certainly hope Flourish wouldn't mean the same thing for restoration druids.


Both CoH and Flourish got 6 second cooldowns in the current alpha not sure about Chain Heal.

The replenish effect of Dreamwalker procced less of lower ranks, alot more than 15% of the highest though.

#22 Surreptitious

Surreptitious

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 220 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 01:40 PM

* Revive: Returns the spirit to the body, restoring a dead target to life with 1800 health and 1365 mana. Cannot be cast when in combat.


An OOC resurrection spell for Druids is long overdue, but I wonder what happened to something that was characterized as one Blizzard's arguments against it in the past; the fact that a druid could potentially stealth through trash and resurrect the rest of a raid/party.

I wonder if they have plans to introduce more stealth-detecting mobs, more narrow hallways, or other similiar features in dungeons.

#23 sadris

sadris

    Period Queef.

  • Members
  • 3,827 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 02:31 PM

How would the party get past the trash to begin with to necesitate a ressurection...?

#24 Cube

Cube

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 102 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 02:32 PM

Overall they gave the 2 missing things, a potent pve aoe heal and a fast direct pvp heal. I would've rather liked the Gift of the Earthmother talent to increase LB by one tic instead of making haste gear hardly beneficial though.


Gift of the Earthmother doesn't effect the AoE heal, though. Also, faster Nourish casts can't be a bad thing, especially if it's castable in tree form.

Also, the latest alpha build(in the tree here) only has Flourish healing the nearest 5 people of the target, not the entire raid. I'm not sure how that effects the usefulness of the heal, overall, though. Without coefficients or any hard ranks, it's difficult to say if this nerf really effects us. It makes life a bit more difficult for raid healing, but raid healing has never been our class' strong point in TBC anyway.

#25 Hamlet

Hamlet

    Mike Tyson

  • • Guide Author
  • 11,567 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 04:12 PM

Another unknown would be what Barks Blessing ended up. Im guessing it was the first attempt to rework a party wide buff raidwide and they scrapped the idea after deciding to not bandaid it but to fix the core mechanic. It is still in the tooltip of Imp ToL so im guessing it might just buff the aura affect instead again.


Hmm, that's too bad. I really liked the idea of a targetted buff--it would jive better with the role of the tree in most raids. But, raidwide buffs seem to be a new emphasis in WotLK.

Overall they gave the 2 missing things, a potent pve aoe heal and a fast direct pvp heal. I would've rather liked the Gift of the Earthmother talent to increase LB by one tic instead of making haste gear hardly beneficial though.


Haste gear already does essentially nothing to boost your Lifeblooms. It only lets you cast Rejuv and other heals slightly more often and reduces cast time of Regrowth. With the new talent, haste no longer gives the slight speedup effect to your cycle, but this might be balanced out by the fact that we use cast-time spells more often. Anyway, right now, haste for Trees is awkward and gives wildly variable benefits, whereas in WotLK it will at least improve one specific thing in a focused manner and should be easier to work with.

It's absolutely useful. Is it necessary? Not really. One example of a useful situation is Zul'jin, where he'll randomly charge someone and do ~16,000 physical, mitigatable, damage over 6 seconds. The current solution, if he Claw Rages a tree, is to shift to bear and have the other healer or two keep you up, so you don't waste a BoP that would be better used on a priest. In the Imp Tree Form version, you just stay in tree form, heal yourself, and move on with your life. Saves the mana of a couple form changes, and doesn't force you to lose your lifebloom stack on the tank.


Zul'jin's Claw Rage isn't affected by Armor, I think. But your point is right--no longer being one-shotted my melee swings is something that perhaps "shouldn't" matter for a healer, but often does.

#26 Erdluf

Erdluf

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 968 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 05:06 PM

Does anyone know the cast time for Revive? OOC rez by a stealth class seems very strong for Arena (and some BG situations too).

#27 malthrin

malthrin

    stalemate associate

  • Moderators
  • 9,107 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 05:11 PM

It's 10 seconds, like the other rezzes. One of the changes published from the first Alpha build was that Druid NS went from making any nature spell instant to any nature spell under 10s.

#28 Tirlas

Tirlas

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 06:52 PM

Does anyone know the cast time for Revive? OOC rez by a stealth class seems very strong for Arena (and some BG situations too).


As far as revive, seems like much fun[read: exploitation] might be had by having nekkid shealth rez runs through instances. Yet mobs will probably be strategically placed with dectect invis.

#29 Arentios

Arentios

    Wisdom as dump stat

  •  Patrons
  • 6,796 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 07:02 PM

An OOC resurrection spell for Druids is long overdue, but I wonder what happened to something that was characterized as one Blizzard's arguments against it in the past; the fact that a druid could potentially stealth through trash and resurrect the rest of a raid/party.

I wonder if they have plans to introduce more stealth-detecting mobs, more narrow hallways, or other similiar features in dungeons.


My initial reaction is to think that it's just a change in design philosophy. Given the emphasis on shorter dungeons (seen all through TBC) softening of trash (making raid trash much more CCable in an early TBC patch) and less trash in general (using Sunwell Plataeu and Magister's Terrace as examples) does the ability to skip a trash pack or two (with the added clause that you have to end up clearing it or rez past it again if you end up needing a full runback) make up for the time and headache being able to perform such an action adds?

I look at how things like Sap and Entangling Roots are being made more universally usable, and the addition of a CC (even on a cooldown) to Shamans, and I see a definite leaning towards making trash a very small factor in instance design.

It just seems like one of those things that people worry about because of hard to quantify fears, but ends up being a minor issue in the long run.

Personally, I'm just sad that this means I'll have to take a more active role in wipe recovery. :(

#30 Ogemaniac

Ogemaniac

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 09 July 2008 - 11:40 PM

Personally, I think the biggest change there is Gift of the Earthmother's effect on Rejuvenation and Lifebloom. Spell Haste will, again, cease to be a useful stat for Druids, but I'm not complaining. With 1 second Lifeblooms we can potentially keep 6 people fully stacked, mana permitting.

Replenish just doesn't strike me as that amazing. Rejuvenation will only tick if the person is at less than maximum health. That's great for Warlocks, Ret Paladins and Tanks, but no one else is consistently below maximum health enough to really benefit. On most fights where they will be, Flourish will probably be cast over Rejuvenation.

Edit: Bah, beat to the punch on my first paragraph.


Gift of the Earthmother actually seems over-powered to me. I think it would be better as .05/.1/.15/.2/.25. There are two reasons

1: Spell haste would remain useful to us. This is important, because having stats that don't help your character cause poor scaling issues (which is one reason why druids and paladins fall behind priests and shamans in TBC raid healing).

2: We are over-reliant on lifebloom for healing now. The proposed .5s GCD reduction would ensure it would stay that way. .25s would keep a better balance with our other healing spells.

Several people have argued that spell haste is already pretty worthless for druids. I disagree. Having spell haste does two very nice things for you

1: You have a lot more wiggle-room in cycling four spells. In reality, most of us switch to three spells when we are running around or things get complicated. It is one thing to rotate between your lifebloom_Tank1 lifebloom_Tank2 lifebloom_Tank3 etc macros and quite another to do something like lifebloom_Tank1 lifebloom T...oh crap! wait rejuv swiftmend...grrr...which lifebloom I on again? lifebloom Tank1...decurse!!!!....etc etc. Without some serious spell haste, I doubt most druids are casting four spells and getting back around to restoring the lifebloom on the MT. There just isn't enough time to cover up for your ~.25s reaction times, shifting fingers, and the time it takes to switch targets.

2: You are faster. Get 150 haste, and your GCD is down to 1.35s or so. That rejuv+swiftmend now goes off .3 seconds sooner, assuming you were in the midst of the previous spell's gcd when you decided to use this combo. Needless to say, this saves lives and wipes.

#31 Benita

Benita

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 262 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 08:46 AM

1: Spell haste would remain useful to us. This is important, because having stats that don't help your character cause poor scaling issues (which is one reason why druids and paladins fall behind priests and shamans in TBC raid healing).


If by raid healing you mean healing more than one target, its the lack of having a heal that affects more than one target. If you mean overall healing output, i can show you some WWS where this is not true throughout whole SWP. Druids and priests dominate healing, shamans in chain heal friendly fights and paladins are the odd man out.

Haste is an awesome stat right now and lets you use 5 gcd's while keeping up lifeblooms or work in regrowths etc. However 80% of my healing is already LB and rejuv, if those dont benefit of haste anymore, i doubt i would use haste unless its 3-4 times as cheap as equivalent +healing (or spellpower). Flourish might change this to 60%, but unless nourish is castable in ToL i dont see a big switch of hot healing for trees.

#32 Montegomery

Montegomery

    Aloof Aggravator

  •  Patrons
  • 3,634 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 06:59 PM

1: Spell haste would remain useful to us. This is important, because having stats that don't help your character cause poor scaling issues (which is one reason why druids and paladins fall behind priests and shamans in TBC raid healing).


I don't agree with this point. There's a threshold at which point this does become a problem (see Shadow Priests), but with Int, Spirit, +Healing and Mp5 all being important stats, we aren't particularly hurt for being able to ignore Spell Haste.

2: We are over-reliant on lifebloom for healing now. The proposed .5s GCD reduction would ensure it would stay that way. .25s would keep a better balance with our other healing spells.


1. All healers have a spell that is simply better than the others. Having healed as a Shaman before my Druid I know that 90% of the time I was spamming various ranks of Healing Wave on the tank, or Chain Heal when I was assigned raid healing. Similar statements can be made about Priests and Paladins.

2. I don't imagine for a moment that it would be easy to maintain 6 Lifebloom stacks. Having to keep track of that many targets, along with the potentially enormous mana cost, would make it prohibitive. While the talent gives us the option of spamming Lifebloom and Rejuvenation absolutely everywhere, I think it's more meant to just give Resto Druids some breathing space.

Several people have argued that spell haste is already pretty worthless for druids. I disagree. Having spell haste does two very nice things for you

1: You have a lot more wiggle-room in cycling four spells. In reality, most of us switch to three spells when we are running around or things get complicated. It is one thing to rotate between your lifebloom_Tank1 lifebloom_Tank2 lifebloom_Tank3 etc macros and quite another to do something like lifebloom_Tank1 lifebloom T...oh crap! wait rejuv swiftmend...grrr...which lifebloom I on again? lifebloom Tank1...decurse!!!!....etc etc. Without some serious spell haste, I doubt most druids are casting four spells and getting back around to restoring the lifebloom on the MT. There just isn't enough time to cover up for your ~.25s reaction times, shifting fingers, and the time it takes to switch targets.

2: You are faster. Get 150 haste, and your GCD is down to 1.35s or so. That rejuv+swiftmend now goes off .3 seconds sooner, assuming you were in the midst of the previous spell's gcd when you decided to use this combo. Needless to say, this saves lives and wipes.


Right, so why are you complaining that you're getting all of that without having to gear for it? 90% of the usefulness of Spell Haste is from how it allows us to do more within a 7 second cycle, which we will soon get in talent form.

#33 Arentios

Arentios

    Wisdom as dump stat

  •  Patrons
  • 6,796 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 07:08 PM

2. I don't imagine for a moment that it would be easy to maintain 6 Lifebloom stacks. Having to keep track of that many targets, along with the potentially enormous mana cost, would make it prohibitive. While the talent gives us the option of spamming Lifebloom and Rejuvenation absolutely everywhere, I think it's more meant to just give Resto Druids some breathing space.


Using present numbers, Lifebloom is the most mana to cast time efficient heal of the standard druid heals. Doing 6 Lifeblooms would cost less than 3 lifeblooms and a regrowth cost now, if only marginally, and only slightly more than 3 lifeblooms and a rejuvenation. To say that it would be enormously costly or prohibitive would be incorrect unless lifebloom's cost increases by a much larger percent than regrowth/rejuv, not factoring in any potential nourish use.

#34 Lord BEEF

Lord BEEF

    Soda Popinski

  • Guild Members
  • 3,826 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 07:18 PM

I'm expecting Gift of the Earthmother to be reduced to 3 ranks, so you get to take off .3 on your global cooldown but no more unless you add spell haste. We'll see though. I wouldn't be excited to have to roll 5+ lifeblooms.

#35 Lupison

Lupison

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 64 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 07:35 PM

An OOC resurrection spell for Druids is long overdue, but I wonder what happened to something that was characterized as one Blizzard's arguments against it in the past; the fact that a druid could potentially stealth through trash and resurrect the rest of a raid/party.

I wonder if they have plans to introduce more stealth-detecting mobs, more narrow hallways, or other similiar features in dungeons.


Well you could always do that from the first level you got your rez spell. Assuming it's up you could just stealth past everything and rez a rezer... I mean granted it burnt your 30 min (now 20) cooldown, but it was possible. This just takes away the cooldown part.

#36 malthrin

malthrin

    stalemate associate

  • Moderators
  • 9,107 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 07:43 PM

I think the point of Gift of the Earthmother is twofold:
1) More free time to use other spells
2) Use mana faster when you're using every GCD

There's not really any reason you'd ever roll 5 Lifeblooms unless you're trying to heal through Encapsulate or something. I envision this conversation leading to the Gift talent:
Designer A: ok, what cool new healing spells can we give Druids
Designer B: Nourish, Flourish
Designer A: Cool, let's do those
Designer C: Druids already spend 50-75% of their GCDs casting Lifebloom, they may not use these
Designer A: Good point let's nerf Lifebloom
Designer B: Probably not a good idea, let's just give them more time so they can use the new stuff
Designer A: Ok, let's increase the duration of Lifebloom so they can refresh less often
Designer C: Do we really want to make Druids more mana efficient? If we make them cast faster it'll do the same thing
Designer B: True, let's make that a talent to encourage people to go deep Resto instead of getting Dreamstate
Designer A: Sounds good, lunchtime!

#37 Darmuth

Darmuth

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 07:54 PM

Here's a question with the one change for the aura everyone in the raid will receive 5% more healing. Any ideas/thoughts as to if the aura should stack or not. If it doesn't stack then would there be any reason to bring more then one tree druid to a raid, but then if it does stack then I could see other healing classes getting left out to increase healing even more by having multiple trees.

#38 Arentios

Arentios

    Wisdom as dump stat

  •  Patrons
  • 6,796 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 07:59 PM

Here's a question with the one change for the aura everyone in the raid will receive 5% more healing. Any ideas/thoughts as to if the aura should stack or not. If it doesn't stack then would there be any reason to bring more then one tree druid to a raid, but then if it does stack then I could see other healing classes getting left out to increase healing even more by having multiple trees.


If it doesn't stack, then the merits of bringing multiple tree druids to a raid depends on the other capabilities that they bring to the table compared to other classes. As an example, holy priests presently do not stack at all in terms of buffs, but that doesn't automatically disqualify having several of them in a raid.

If it does stack, it's still a very similar situation. What other abilities do resto druids bring. Do those abilities combined with the stacking bonus outweigh what other classes bring?

It's the same question that has to be dealt with now with things like blessings, totems, and synergy in general.

#39 Hamlet

Hamlet

    Mike Tyson

  • • Guide Author
  • 11,567 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 08:03 PM

If it doesn't stack then would there be any reason to bring more then one tree druid to a raid


Do you currently justify the second Tree in your raids because of a second group aura?

#40 Darmuth

Darmuth

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 10 July 2008 - 09:12 PM

Do you currently justify the second Tree in your raids because of a second group aura?


In some fights like ones that have multiple MT's the second aura is worth it due to being able to get optimal tank groups with pally shaman lock druid and tank.

Granted flame tank healing for illidan is pretty easy I (I'm the healing lead) can put one main healer on each of the flame tanks and both druids keep rolling LBs up on both tanks, leaving all the other healers to raid heal.

Though our second resto mainly came along from a time where we were short on healers and he filled the roll well. We weren't looking for another tree in particular just some more healing (we were just starting Bloodboil at the time), he just was at the right place at the right time and joined us (I still find it odd seeing a second tree I was pretty much the only tree from Kara halfway through BT).

It was mainly a thought exercise if the aura will stack or not. Also was hoping that someone would have heard or maybe know. I doubt it will effect our group that much either way.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users