Jump to content


Warning for littlejim: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil.

  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 Snowy


    Mitt Romney?

  • Moderators
  • 10,255 posts

Posted 31 January 2010 - 07:07 PM

Post: WotLK Healing Compendium v3.3: Arthas' downfall!
User: littlejim
Infraction: 3. All discussion should be both polite and civil.
Points: 0

Administrative Note:

Message to User:

I'll let you off with a warning for this one, but you even said it yourself. Be more civil. If you think a user's post is complete garbage, perhaps you should report it instead and let a moderator make the call.

Original Post:

Be prepared for a long one:

It's pretty safe to say that a priest who doesn't go oom on an encounter is either doing something very wrong or just isn't healing enough. Alternativly, You have too many healers in the raid.

...On Blood-Queen...our first kill I had to go through two innervates and my shadowfiend, I finished the fight at approx 60% mana....

...Conclusion: The more mana you have, the more you can heal. The more haste you have, the faster you cast thus making you oom quicker if you do nothing but stacking haste.
Your goal is not to heal fast whenever you see someone go low...

...CoH and PoM has no benefit from haste whatsoever apart from casting them 0.1sec faster due to lower GCD....

...The better throughput and longetivity you have, the less healers your guild has to bring, the less healers you bring, the more dps you can bring, the more dps you bring the shorter the fight becomes thus making int, spirit and spellpower all very desirable...

Okay, so at the risk of sounding inflammatory, your post is complete garbage. First of all, the goal as a healer is most definitely not to go oom. It's actually quite a good sign if you complete a fight with surplus mana, because it indicates that you will be able to cope if something goes wrong in future (other healers die/dc/whatever proverbial shit hits the fan) and it also indicates that you are prepared for future encounters that will stretch your mana pool further. After informing us that a good priest healer goes oom, you then tell us that you weren't even close to oom on your first Blood Queen kill. Apart from completely contradicting yourself, your evidence is anecdotal at best and doesn't include enough specifics to the encounter you are referencing to even allow any limited analysis (did you have a resto shaman in your group? do you think you were in range of mana tide? did you use a mana restoring potion? how many healers did you use? Did you combo hymn of hope + shadowfiend? What trinkets did you use?).

Next, you inform us that our goal isn't to heal people quickly when they are at low health. Maybe I missed the memo, but I'm pretty sure that players that are low health are the ones that are most likely to die and need healing the most, preferably in a timely manner. I'm surprised that I have to state something like that, but the only other concept that I can possibly imagine you to be referencing is heal "sniping," which is also a ridiculous thing to bring up. Our discussions need to operate under the assumption that we are trying to min/max our performance in an endgame environment, not whoring meters in Naxx 25. This is quickly followed by your statement that haste benefits CoH and PoM in no way, except by reducing their cast times. Well, what exactly is the benefit that you expect haste to give to spells?

Finally, you wrap it up by telling us (still completely lacking any numbers or evidence) that we should buff our effective mana pools as much as possible, in order to maximize the number of dps players that can be brought in raids, with the end result being shorter fights. I'd really like to hear the reasoning and see some rough numbers that explain why stacking regen is a good idea, if you are intentionally reducing the amount of time (and damage) that you will have to heal for.

Please delete your post.

I really disagree tbh... You make it sound like on every fight you know exactly what's going to happen, how much mana you're gonna need and what spells you're gonna use. For farm content or old content I agree that haste is the superior stat because of what you have pointed out, but on progress raids I believe that spellpower is king and crit has it's importance. How often is your first kill of a boss perfectly clean, with 25/25 people alive and your mana at 40%? I know 85% of the time our first kills are very messy and we've usually only got 10-20 people alive with 2-4 healers spamming their lives out to keep the raid alive for the last %'s.

In situations like this, I think a priest with heavy spellpower, moderate crit, moderate haste and good regen is superior to a pure haste priest for the following reasons:

1. The pure haste priest is only good at furiously spamming spells to snipe heals and achieve good throughput. If 1-3 healers die/run OOM because of the raid falling apart, this priest will quickly find himself running out of mana aswell.

2. On the other hand, the more balanced priest will have slightly better regen and thus will last longer, he will also have much more crit and spellpower and potentially save people's lives with big PoH or CoH crits even though it takes him 0.6 more seconds to cast.

The way I see it, haste and crit basically do the same thing... without making your base heal stronger, they make it better by either making it fire off faster or giving it a chance to heal for alot more. The difference is that critting doesn't cost more mana, casting faster does. Also, the argument that "crits lead to overhealing" is in my opinion irrelevant because casting faster can just as well lead to overhealing.

I agree that every healer needs a comfortable effective mana pool "buffer" worked into their gearing, so that they can cope with progress. That said, I personally prefer to gear myself for full throughput and keep regen + throughput trinkets in my bags, to easily adjust between fights. I really can't think of a single time I've wiped due to going oom, or been on the brink of being oom on a first kill in any encounter in WotLK. As rough estimates, I've usually gotten 0-1 innervates, 1-2 resto shaman in my group, I have the tailoring cloak enchant and I almost always combo shadowfiend with hymn of hope. I have completely average gear (a few hard mode drops, nothing to write home about) and I gem haste, but I think the difference in our experiences is due to trinkets. I'm guessing you haven't been lucky with Solace drops, which is obviously a very big upgrade over the alternatives in terms of regen. But as for the second choice of trinket, provides a ridiculous amount of regen. I know it's been mentioned before, but I think that if we're still having the same old discussion over whether holy priests have major mana problems or not, the players complaining clearly haven't tried out or seen the math on . So here goes:

Using my last Blood Queen 25 kill (spamming renew mostly, fight time 5:19) and assuming the spirit on Spark of Hope gives ~ 36.2 mp5 and ~ 28 spellpower fully raid buffed:

max theoretical mp5 from Spark of Hope on the fight

Raid Buffed GCD: ~ 1.1 sec
Total Heals cast = 319/1.1 = 290
Mp5 from effect = (42/1.1)(5) = 190.9 mp5
Total Mp5 = 190.9 + 36.2 = 227.1 mp5

Actual mp5 for the fight

Total Heals cast = 207
Mp5 from the effect = (207)(42)(5)/(319) = 136.3 mp5
Total Mp5 = 136.3 + 36.2 = 172.5 mp5

Now comparing to (assuming the sliver has ~70 mp5) and changing int gems for spellpower (using the op's estimates) we get:

172.5 - 70 = 102.5 mp5
Int required to achieve 102.5 mp5: 102.5/0.792 = 129.4 int
Converting to spellpower by changing gems: (129.4)(23)/20 = 148.8 spellpower
Total spellpower: 148.8 + 28 (from spirit) = [B]176.8 spellpower (18 spellpower more than the Sliver)

Therefore, if you have any int gems whatsoever, you can maintain your regen and increase your spellpower by using + regemming, unless you're using a trinket that is reasonably superior to (basically only Solace so far). My apologies if I slipped up anywhere in the numbers, but the conclusion should be about the same.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users