Jump to content


Photo

WotLK Healing Compendium v3.2: Same Old Thing


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
1039 replies to this topic

#1021 Elimbras

Elimbras

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 477 posts

Posted 25 November 2009 - 02:14 PM

It certainly doesn't.


It doesn't if you take exact number, so you're litterally correct.
But the difference is very small.
Discounting haste (which will have the same multiplicative effect on both cast time), a divine-fury GH is 2.5s long. If serenpidity is stacked, that's 35% less, so it's 1.6s.
At the same time, FH is 1.5s cast. Difference is 0.1s, that seems quite negligible for me compared to the output difference (if needed).

Now, haste will divide both cast time by the same number, so the difference will be divided by the same number.
That leads to a difference of 0.1s with 0%haste, 0.091 with 10% haste, 0.83s with 20% haste, 0.76s with 30% haste. I can buy the "a serendity stacked divine-fury talented greatheal takes the same time to cast as a flash-heal" argument. It doesn't rigorously, but the difference is nearly negligible.

#1022 Fairmont

Fairmont

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 25 November 2009 - 02:55 PM

It doesn't if you take exact number, so you're litterally correct.
But the difference is very small.
Discounting haste (which will have the same multiplicative effect on both cast time), a divine-fury GH is 2.5s long. If serenpidity is stacked, that's 35% less, so it's 1.6s.
At the same time, FH is 1.5s cast. Difference is 0.1s, that seems quite negligible for me compared to the output difference (if needed).

Now, haste will divide both cast time by the same number, so the difference will be divided by the same number.
That leads to a difference of 0.1s with 0%haste, 0.091 with 10% haste, 0.83s with 20% haste, 0.76s with 30% haste. I can buy the "a serendity stacked divine-fury talented greatheal takes the same time to cast as a flash-heal" argument. It doesn't rigorously, but the difference is nearly negligible.


Yes I can see your point. But the question about it's usefulness still remains. You will only cast it if the hp deficit of the target you are casting it on exceeds the healing a FH would do (unless the target has aggro perhaps for safety measure), else there would be no point to use it as it will most likely overheal.

But... Is it possible that other raidhealers are also healing the same target at the same time? If yes, is GH even worth casting or will it overheal or overheal only for a part? If the latter is the case, what will the HPM be compared to a (simple) FH? Would your GH make others overheal their whole heal? And at the end, is this situational use enough to spend 5 points in Divine Fury?

Another thing, I guess we can agree on that GH is only used when Serendipity is up with 3 stacks, right? So let's see what the difference is between a full Serendipity-stacked GH with and without Divine Fury.

GH + DF + 3x Serendipity = 1.6 sec
GH + 3x Serendipity = 1.92 sec

The difference is 0.32 sec for 5 talent points. Along with the fact that it is very situational in the first place I personally drew the conclusion that it is far too expensive for that matter.

#1023 Glasswizard

Glasswizard

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 90 posts

Posted 25 November 2009 - 04:15 PM

If you're a healer and you're one of the last people alive when you wipe, you're doing it wrong.


I don't understand this, could you elaborate? I am certainly very often one of the last people to die. Obviously, with low boss threat, ranged class and numerous spells like Binding Heal, PW:S, Desperate Prayer to save myself.

Concerning Anub Phase 3 and Spell Warding: I don't see where it's supposed to be useful there. We set up the raid in such a way that some totem or shadow priest heals the group vs the aura, AE heals are forbidden. The rest is all about landing any heal/shield before the first PC tick, rest is a piece of cake anyway. The first tick will kill me anyway if I don't get something, with or without spell warding. So where is it useful here? (Ok, except if you tank healing - where you should be disc skilled anyway - Greater Heal won't be very useful on this encounter, either)

#1024 Senres

Senres

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 54 posts

Posted 26 November 2009 - 03:15 AM

It doesn't if you take exact number, so you're litterally correct. But the difference is very small..

Thank you for clearing that up. No, the cast times are not exactly the same. In typical raid gear, unbuffed, I run with 616 haste. At that haste level my Flash heal is at 1.26s and my GH is at 1.35s. Quartz reports both as 1.3s which is why I said what I said. For all intents and purposes they are the same cast time. My apologies for not being exact..

The difference is 0.32 sec for 5 talent points. Along with the fact that it is very situational in the first place I personally drew the conclusion that it is far too expensive for that matter.

You're right, it is a small benefit for 5 talent points. Then again, so is 10% reduction in spell damage taken in my opinion.

I don't understand this, could you elaborate? I am certainly very often one of the last people to die. Obviously, with low boss threat, ranged class and numerous spells like Binding Heal, PW:S, Desperate Prayer to save myself.

Agreed. I'm not sure where his/her comment came from. In my opinion you are doing something wrong if you are one of the first ones to die as a priest. Priests have a lot of spells to help keep them alive.

#1025 Vanthere

Vanthere

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 26 November 2009 - 08:03 AM

For all intents and purposes it seems as if the conclusion is greater heal is good with 3 stacks of serendipity for healing incinerate flesh, and for healing tanks when it seems as though the tank healers are behind. O and on faction champs for when a target is taking enormous amounts of burst dmg.

I find greater heal useless because i never encounter these scenarios.

We have one Pally healer for all of TOGC (aside from anub) and on anub we use 2. This one pally healer is specifically on tanks for every fight. He alone sustains our tanks with our other healers just hotting and POM/earthshield on them. The tanks are never in a situation health wise that would demand a priest to throw a greater heal on them period.

The same gos for incinerate flesh. Our one paladin healer heals it as his primary job while the other healers maybe toss 1 or 2 quick heals at them and its off within a few seconds.

For faction champs its the same story. If someone is taking sustained burst dmg then the paladin heals them. In a case where that's not enough Guardian spirit glyphed is a 1 minute cool down and is far superior to greater heal for any and all cases where people are in that sort of danger. And if people are in that type of danger more than 1 time in a minute then your raid needs to learn situational awareness or the CC has been assigned incorrectly.

People are right in that we have a ton of spells and many of them are situational and a top notch holy priest uses each one accordingly.

However for me as a raid healer i find 5 spells in my arsenal that pretty much cover every single situation in this order. POM,COH,RENEW,Surge of light FLASH HEAL, and POH.

That does not set in stone that these are all that should be used but what a holy priest excels at is healing burst dmg to a raid. And these spells are what you use to do that.

I find it strange that so many priest do not use renew all the time. On most hard mode toc fights i find that renew,coh,pom, and poh generally share a pretty close percentage of my healing done for basically every encounter with the exception of anubarak.

#1026 pindle

pindle

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 26 November 2009 - 01:14 PM

I find greater heal useless because i never encounter these scenarios.


This line is exactly why this whole discussion is a moot point. I can never seem to drop 5/5 DF because my priest is an alt who sees ToGC10 as highest content atm, usually in a setup with another (holy) priest or druid. This means virtually every time I will be the tank healer and I won't drop DF just because of that.

For every 25 ToGC running priest in here, the same counts. Are you blanketing the raid with renew, pom, coh? Then you and your raidgroup probably already settled for your raid healer role and you probably don't have 5/5 DF. Are you often assigned to tank healing because your raid doesn't have paladins, or they suck? I'm fairly sure that, given the fact you're spending 70+% of your time tankhealing, you'll grab 5/5 DF.
Although it's a very debatable talent at best, I feel I just can't justify dropping it just because I will still cast one, two, or maybe a few more every fight. In a case where I cast a Gheal, the tank is either in bad shape and I need to top him asap, or I know he'll get alot of damage and a flash might not be enough. Yes other healers may help out, but are you willing to take gambles about tanks living or dying every heavy tank damage fight? I don't.

Different setups, different styles, as far as I see it there's no definite answer.

#1027 Ayreon

Ayreon

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 114 posts

Posted 26 November 2009 - 10:13 PM

If you are tank healing 70̀̀% of the time as you say, why not just spec disc?

#1028 Nuke

Nuke

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 62 posts

Posted 27 November 2009 - 08:46 AM

In a case where I cast a Gheal, the tank is either in bad shape and I need to top him asap, or I know he'll get alot of damage and a flash might not be enough. Yes other healers may help out, but are you willing to take gambles about tanks living or dying every heavy tank damage fight? I don't.

Maybe just use GS on him in those cases?

#1029 Hegen

Hegen

    In gear/DCT lock pin

  • Members
  • 1,540 posts

Posted 27 November 2009 - 09:28 AM

This line is exactly why this whole discussion is a moot point. I can never seem to drop 5/5 DF because my priest is an alt who sees ToGC10 as highest content atm, usually in a setup with another (holy) priest or druid. This means virtually every time I will be the tank healer and I won't drop DF just because of that.


Ayreons comment regarding speccing disc is a good one. Still, I am interested as to why you choose to run as holy in that setup. I have been only running 10 mans for some time now, and beginning with Ulduar hard modes, I have moved - reluctantly - from switching between holy and disc to disc only.

My impression still is, that in most places healing as disc helps a 10 man raid more than healing as holy - except if the other healer already is a holy priest.

This includes places like Freya+3, where 2-healing as disc in a 10 man equipped T8 raid in combination with a holy paladin sounded insane at the time, but ultimately turned out to be much safer than holy. Sure, overall throughput is lower, but death prevention seemed to be worth more.

That said, it is a long time since I have tried sustained tank healing as holy. Is your opinion/experience that this is now sustainable with mana pools in T9 content?

The simple fact is this. We are told to concentrate more. But we can only do that if we are allowed to go considerably faster.


#1030 pindle

pindle

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 132 posts

Posted 27 November 2009 - 12:04 PM

If you are tank healing 70̀̀% of the time as you say, why not just spec disc?

I am 90% of the time already, still prefer holy at some fights (e.g. Twins where shields are near useless).


Maybe just use GS on him in those cases?

Because it has 1 minute cooldown at best and we often use it as part of our strat.


Ayreons comment regarding speccing disc is a good one. Still, I am interested as to why you choose to run as holy in that setup. I have been only running 10 mans for some time now, and beginning with Ulduar hard modes, I have moved - reluctantly - from switching between holy and disc to disc only.

My impression still is, that in most places healing as disc helps a 10 man raid more than healing as holy - except if the other healer already is a holy priest.

This includes places like Freya+3, where 2-healing as disc in a 10 man equipped T8 raid in combination with a holy paladin sounded insane at the time, but ultimately turned out to be much safer than holy. Sure, overall throughput is lower, but death prevention seemed to be worth more.

That said, it is a long time since I have tried sustained tank healing as holy. Is your opinion/experience that this is now sustainable with mana pools in T9 content?


Well as I said it's all about your role and the setups you run with. My role is *very* versatile (usually compensating crap healers in ToC10 normal, or ToGC10 with 2), but I'm never a pure raid healer since we almost always have a druid or other holy priest. I also do mainly 10 mans as it is an alt. Doing the compensation job I'm more holy than usual because, frankly, sometimes the throughput of disc is simply lacking (I'm thinking Jaraxxus e.g. where the debuff isn't healed through fast enough, or Twins). Granted, we could take less crap geared people, or I could smack the dps everytime they stand in fire too long, but it just doesn't work like that and especially not with alts.

Maybe I'm a control freak but I cannot justify a tank dying now and then - even if I'm not tank healing! - all because I couldn't deliver enough throughput with FH (and/or PoM). I just like to be that versatile. As said I can perfectly accept raid healers dropping it, however, if you'll be (support) healing a tank even 5% of the time, I can't miss it. In 25 man raids it's much easier to rely on some palading sniping some heals doing your job. Which was kind of my point, do you run 10 or 25 mans mostly, only normals or hardmodes, how are the other healers, how's the setup, etc., this talent's value is imo very dependant on that.

As for holy's viability as a tank healer, it's not that bad really, I feel it's just as stable as Disc if you know the fights (being Disc it's a little easier to just heal reactively because Penance just is that good :) ) albeit a little less mana efficient.

#1031 Sinndir

Sinndir

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 865 posts

Posted 02 December 2009 - 05:06 PM

As Nid is currently pretty busy and unable to keep track of a new thread, I'm going to do some editing and repost a compendium thread for 3.3 - Icecrown. If there is anything specific you'd like to be discussed or included in the threads main post please PM me.

#1032 Guest_Aeshun_*

Guest_Aeshun_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2009 - 09:44 PM

Hello,

My guild has started to work on Anub'arak in ToGC and I just had some questions about phase 3 mechanics. Now I have heard conflicting arguments regarding discipline during the leeching swarm - does the leeching swarm take Power Word: Shield into account when it does its percentage-based sap? Or does Power Word: Shield become extremely powerful when the shielded stabilizes at a low percentage health?

#1033 Cras

Cras

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 02 December 2009 - 09:50 PM

Hello,

My guild has started to work on Anub'arak in ToGC and I just had some questions about phase 3 mechanics. Now I have heard conflicting arguments regarding discipline during the leeching swarm - does the leeching swarm take Power Word: Shield into account when it does its percentage-based sap? Or does Power Word: Shield become extremely powerful when the shielded stabilizes at a low percentage health?


Power Word: Shield does not absorb the Leeching Swarm ticks.

#1034 Kashir

Kashir

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 166 posts

Posted 02 December 2009 - 10:58 PM

Power Word: Shield does not absorb the Leeching Swarm ticks.

That's possibly a little confusing.

Leeching Swarm damage / healing is calculated based on your current health; it does not take any damage mitigation effects (including absorbs) into account when determining the damage for the next tick.

PWS and other aborb effects will prevent the damage (so if you land an 8k shield with no glyph at <1000 health, it will last for ~32 ticks of 250 per hit, or more than the PWS duration), but the leech still heals Anub'arak.

Unless you've come up with some bizarre healing strategy, it's a bad idea to use PWS for Swarm healing. Leeching Swarm healing is trivial in all versions of the encounter (from 10N to 25H); PC is the dangerous ability in p3, and that means you need PWS ready to save people, and that means no Weakened Soul.

#1035 Bain

Bain

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 19 posts

Posted 03 December 2009 - 02:06 AM

I am 90% of the time already, still prefer holy at some fights (e.g. Twins where shields are near useless).


Sorry, just wanted to clear this up for myself.

I'm pretty certain PW:S spam on Twins works, and works well. It just isn't displayed on World of Logs maybe due to the specific fight mechanic. But myself and the other healers can tell the difference when I'm not Disc on this specific fight (twins heroic).

I can see the shield's get absorbed via my grid, or by just simply looking at the shield fall off of my fellow raiders, shortly after applying it. I'm not sure if there's something else at play here, but i felt like i had to post because i wanted it clarified for myself.

We currently run 2xdruids/1xshaman/2xpaladins/1xpriest, and it's worked every week for us so far. But would i be much better of as Holy for this fight?

#1036 Finkum

Finkum

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 268 posts

Posted 03 December 2009 - 04:42 AM

PW:S spam works exactly as you'd expect for Twins, but because of Weakened Soul and the way the damage occurs, Holy has stronger tools (empowered Renew, better ProM, CoH) for healing the damage.

PW:S spam is strongest against infrequent spike damage like Kologarn's Overhead Smash or Freya's Ground Tremor; it is comparatively less powerful against persistent periodic damage like the Twins aura ticks.

"IRONBRANCH, THE FLOWER BED IS IN DANGER! ASSIST ME!"


#1037 pocketmage

pocketmage

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 04 December 2009 - 04:58 PM

PW:S spam also works on Faction Champs. You can do it full time, as well as have a quicker Mass Dispel for the Bloodlust/Heroism they do, all the while be able to run around (and away from hostiles) without batting an eyelash.

#1038 htordeux

htordeux

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 05 December 2009 - 08:28 AM

Hi priests
Sorry for my "frenglish" , could enlight me on somme different value of haste
if I want my GH go from 2.5 sec to 2 sec, unbuff.
I refer to Casting speed - WoWWiki - Your guide to the World of Warcraft

at level 80
% Spell Haste at level 80 = (Haste Rating / 32.79)
so 1% haste= 32.79
so 20 % haste = 655.8
so GH = 2.5 - ( 2.5*20/100)= 2 sec


an other formula gives
Haste Rating needed at level 80 =
((Base Cast Time / Desired Cast Time) - 1) * 32.79 * 100

for GH
((2.5 sec / 2 sec)-1)* 32.79 * 100 = (1.25-1)* 32.79 * 100 = 819.75

why this difference between these two value of haste?
for the same reduction of GH cast time

#1039 Elimbras

Elimbras

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 477 posts

Posted 05 December 2009 - 12:31 PM

You need to understand the mechanism of haste :
Hasted spells have the following cast time (with haste between 0 and 1, as a percentage).

Hasted_Cast_Time = Base_Cast_Time / (1 + haste)

This means that your first computation is wrong : with 20% haste, you get a gh at 2.5 / 1.2 ~ 2.08. You need 25% haste, as your second formula tells you.

#1040 htordeux

htordeux

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 06 December 2009 - 05:12 PM

You need to understand the mechanism of haste :
Hasted spells have the following cast time (with haste between 0 and 1, as a percentage).

Hasted_Cast_Time = Base_Cast_Time / (1 + haste)

This means that your first computation is wrong : with 20% haste, you get a gh at 2.5 / 1.2 ~ 2.08. You need 25% haste, as your second formula tells you.


OK, Thanks;
I can calculate that a correct value of haste for a holy priest to decrease GCD from 1,5 to 1,3 is 505 haste.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users