Holy Priest usage in raids - Page 9

♦ Praetorian · 06/15/07, 6:34 PM

Not sure if I'm contributing here, but I've always found holy priests exceptionally versatile and useful in the TBC environment. With the heal/spirit itemization out there now their HPS and longevity is incredible. We typically have two holy priests, and we run healer-light raids to the point that I'm always surprised whenever I hear other guilds talk about their ordinary raid compositions.

We typically have 3 paladins, 2 priests, and 1 shaman healing, and if we bring a seventh healer that's seen as bringing an "extra" healer because a particular fight is apparently really healing-intensive.

I realize my post isn't very analytical, but as a raid leader I've never wanted to replace one of the priests with a healer from some other class.

duostrike · 06/15/07, 6:41 PM

Originally Posted by Renew

All it takes is one Priest to do most of that. With correct positioning and understanding of fights, Shaman, Paladins and the token Druid can fill the second Priests role in any raid.

Stop using the same argument over and over and over like it gains relevance the more it's said... This is what I think blizzard is INTENDING. They want people to be interchangeable. However, they aim their optimal balance for 2-3 of each class in the raid with 1 per class required

Can't get 3 rogues for your raid. Swap in other dps. Can't get 3 mages? Swap in other dps. Can't get 3 priests? Swap in other healing. This is a benefit to the balancing scheme. It's not a bad thing.

Please give reasons why having only one healing priest required is a bad thing.

Renew · 06/15/07, 6:45 PM

Originally Posted by Praetorian

Not sure if I'm contributing here, but I've always found holy priests exceptionally versatile and useful in the TBC environment. With the heal/spirit itemization out there now their HPS and longevity is incredible. We typically have two holy priests, and we run healer-light raids to the point that I'm always surprised whenever I hear other guilds talk about their ordinary raid compositions.

We typically have 3 paladins, 2 priests, and 1 shaman healing, and if we bring a seventh healer that's seen as bringing an "extra" healer because a particular fight is apparently really healing-intensive.

I realize my post isn't very analytical, but as a raid leader I've never wanted to replace one of the priests with a healer from some other class.

It seems a lot of guilds rarely run Druids. Before BC Druids were a class we had 3-4 of (Healing) and it sucks now in BC we had to cut that number down as of late to 1-2 depending on attendance.

This thread though is right and if all players you have available are equal in skill, it is better to stack the raid with those classes who can bring more than one raid wide buff. Obviously if our Shaman were terrible (they are amazing) then we would probably be running our 3 druid lineup again... but for min/max puposes, even if the Druids are amazing, which they are, we run our Shaman when we can for totems and Heroism. We recruited two solid Priests recently and that leaves us at 3 amazing Priests, but dropping an extra blessing or totem buffer just isn't smart when progression content would be made easier.

Renew · 06/15/07, 6:48 PM

Originally Posted by duostrike

Stop using the same argument over and over and over like it gains relevance the more it's said... This is what I think blizzard is INTENDING. They want people to be interchangeable. However, they aim their optimal balance for 2-3 of each class in the raid with 1 per class required

Can't get 3 rogues for your raid. Swap in other dps. Can't get 3 mages? Swap in other dps. Can't get 3 priests? Swap in other healing. This is a benefit to the balancing scheme. It's not a bad thing.

Please give reasons why having only one healing priest required is a bad thing.

It's not bad, but it's not optimal either if you have the classes online ready to go and take that spot from the extra Priest. Content is made a lot easier with a stacked buff class raid.

We raided up till 2.1 with 1 Paladin for everything and did fairly well. Everything save Vashj, Kael'thas was dead for us. We raid now with a fairly stacked raid and people are able to play instead of pray they don't pull aggro, run out of mana or fail a DPS check.

♦ Praetorian · 06/15/07, 6:54 PM

Originally Posted by Renew

It seems a lot of guilds rarely run Druids. Before BC Druids were a class we had 3-4 of (Healing) and it sucks now in BC we had to cut that number down as of late to 1-2 depending on attendance.

This thread though is right and if all players you have available are equal in skill, it is better to stack the raid with those classes who can bring more than one raid wide buff. Obviously if our Shaman were terrible (they are amazing) then we would probably be running our 3 druid lineup again... but for min/max puposes, even if the Druids are amazing, which they are, we run our Shaman when we can for totems and Heroism. We recruited two solid Priests recently and that leaves us at 3 amazing Priests, but dropping an extra blessing or totem buffer just isn't smart when progression content would be made easier.

Well, we typically have 2 non-healing shamans (1 ele, 1 enhance or 2 ele) to cover that utility, and I'm the chain heal bot. I do agree that I'd never want to drop below 3 holy paladins since I'm skeptical regarding the usefulness of ret and prot paladins in raids, and I want 3 to have all blessings covered. If ret or prot could really fill a tank or DPS slot in a Black Temple raid, though, I'd happily drop down to only 1 or 2 holy paladins. We don't bring holy paladins because they're the best healers out there (as of 2.1, anyway -- prepatch you could just put 2 paladins in a group with a shadow priest and they could sustain 5k HPS on a tank between the two of them for eternity). We bring them because paladins up to 3 offer huge raid benefits, and because what paladins do best is heal.

With druids, if we had more active resto druids, I'd probably go with a lineup of 1 druid, 2 priests, 3 paladins, and 1 shaman for most healing purposes. I guess the way I look at it, I bring the other classes because of their synergy and buffs and they get to heal in the meantime. I bring priests purely for their healing abilities.

Failure · 06/15/07, 7:04 PM

Originally Posted by Renew

All it takes is one Priest to do most of that. With correct positioning and understanding of fights, Shaman, Paladins and the token Druid can fill the second Priests role in any raid.

We have one Paladin solo people on graves... If people aren't topped when graved then your other healers aren't doing their job. Chain Heal will have everyone topped off after a quake in no time, especially if you run the 3 shaman minmax some people do.

Solarian we have one Druid solo heal the two off tanks. At the end we throw extra help on them because healing her at 20% is trivial.

Original Gruul, if a Mage was gonna get hit by someone then you need to sit that Mage for someone who could actually use the pillars and blink.

Leotheras is trivial... I can see how mending is nice, but so is Chain Heal (IMO better than Mending for this example).

Al'ar any raid healer can keep the raid topped... zzz.

Some bad examples to be honest. I rerolled Paladin for my guild because a second blessing was greater than having second Priest. There are things I miss that my Priest had and my Paladin doesn't, but it's mainly because the other healers in the raid weren't doing the task I assigned to them.

I agree most those fights are trivial, but your responses to mine are all slightly off.

1. Morogrim. If you've never had a tomb and a grave literally 1 second apart, you must be doing a different fight than me, my bad.
2. Original Gruul - k, I guess you can easier find 25 people that did it perfectly, we never did, and even people who were great at getting away sometimes got unlucky. Wait, bad luck never happens, it's pointless to use abilities to minimize bad luck.
3. Leotheras is trivial, part of the point is it takes 1 instant cast global for a priest to keep people up, rather than a shaman spamming chain heal. The priest can then heal the tanks, or anyone else. Drop a healer who's healing the MT, grab another dps, and thats more dps than totems, or a blessing.
4. Solarian/Alar, perhaps bad examples, but a priest I think can do the job better than a single shaman in a lot of situations. Also, Alar did significantly more dmg to the raid in p1 prepatch than post, and I specifically said now it's not even an issue, I was referring to pre-patch. For Solarian, I agree druid does a good job at healing those 2 tanks as well. Both druid and priest are better for it than paladin or shaman.

In the end, you can use any healer you want, but if you want to run a raid with fewer healers, I think you will have to rely on priest healing to a decent degree.

duostrike · 06/15/07, 7:06 PM

Originally Posted by Praetorian

I do agree that I'd never want to drop below 3 holy paladins since I'm skeptical regarding the usefulness of ret and prot paladins in raids, and I want 3 to have all blessings covered.

Isn't this really the crux of why holy priests are upset at paladins? 3 paladins = 3 blessings. Most raid leaders really want these 3 blessings and will sub-out players regardless. Perhaps blizzard should look into either getting 3 blessings out of 2 paladins or just max out the number of blessings a person can have at 2.

To be honest I am not really convinced that blizzard screwed up here in regards to class desirability in raids though. The only real outliers here are paladins and warlocks. Each have 1 per person type of buffs/debuffs which is why they tend to stand out favorably when looking at class stacking. Perhaps some tweaks to these mechanics might be in order but it's pretty good the way it is now.

Zwink · 06/15/07, 7:08 PM

What many people are forgetting is that there are ways to free up raid spots so you can bring more Holy Priests and Restoration Druids. I was shocked to hear Praetorian say they only run with 1 Shaman, but then I read on to see that they also run with Elemental and Enhancement Shamans. Having 3 Shamans in the raid is ideal, but it's not ideal due to their healing. There's nothing wrong with their healing. Just like many have argued in regard to Priests, other classes can do it just fine. It's ideal because of the DPS buffs they give the raid. If you fill those 3 Shaman spots with 1 of each type, you free up raid slots for Holy Priests and Restoration Druids. Consequently you lower the number of pure DPS classes in the raid, but typically you do have more than 3 of some pure DPS classes in raids.

Renew · 06/15/07, 7:19 PM

Originally Posted by Praetorian

I guess the way I look at it, I bring the other classes because of their synergy and buffs and they get to heal in the meantime. I bring priests purely for their healing abilities.

That's a good summary on things.

tunah · 06/15/07, 9:23 PM

Originally Posted by Floria

I don't follow these assumptions. If 3/4 of the population of paladins were Retribution, would you be bringing 2 Ret pallies? I don't see anyone doing that ever.

Sorry, I said prot was not currently considered a raid role for paladins, thought it went without saying that ret wasn't either.

Bokchoy · 06/15/07, 9:43 PM

Originally Posted by moowalk

Emphasis mine.

How exactly is binding heal useful? Are you referring to its low threat generation?

No other spell heals 4k total non-crit with a 1.5 second cast at the mana-efficiency of Greater Heal. In the Gorefiend and Naj'entus fights, you are frequently taking damage while having to maintain a high HPS.

Bokchoy · 06/15/07, 9:55 PM

Originally Posted by Lithose

Options?

Those options might be used if some of the other classes are deleted, perhaps..I mean, really, look at the holy priests "options"..

Good hots...druid.

Group heals...Chain heal.

Single target efficiency..Paladins.

Now, your correct in stating, as others have said, that a priest can do all of these..But how is that a strength, exactly? If your already bringing these other classes for their extra-healing support, then why not just have them fulfill the niche healing rolls?

You see, thats the conundrum, isn't it. Priests can do all types of healing, while other classes are limited, however, in a raid, you want those other classes, so the priests "all around" healing is diminished. Further adding on to this is the fact that those classes bring an immense amount of non-healing support to the role, so having them filling those niche healing rolls is extremely beneficial in the end, as you get those niche rolls filled, while also gaining amazing side benefits.

The ability for a priest to "branch" out in healing would only be useful if raids were only allowed to bring a certain number of hybrids..Well, thats not the case, and as long as it isn't, then any classes with aura/raid based buffs, which can fill a niche healing roll as well, will always be preferencial.

Don't get me wrong, I think priests still are spot on in their healing power..I think their support, however, is *terribly* lacking..They need adjustments in what they bring to the raid, beyond raid wide buffs..Replacing lolwell with a type of group aura, would be a damn fine start.

The fact that a Priest can do everything is huge, and I think you are underestimating it. Also, you're ignoring the things that Priests can do that no other healer can do. PW:S, group healing (chain heal is raid healing, not group healing), get Innervated for 14,000 man, etc... Don't underestimate Prayer of Mending. It doesn't give you credit on the healing meters, so it's hard to quantify how powerful it is, especially on fights where, no matter where the PoM jumps to, he is guaranteed to take damage within the next few seconds.

We used to run only 1 Holy Priest, but out of attunement and attendance issues, I've respecced from Shadow to Holy, and despite not having stacking non-healing benefits, the versatility from the 2nd Holy Priests really seem to shine in BT. The more I raid in BT, the more I believe that two Holy Priests is optimal, even at the expense of one of the other healing classes.

NicotineJones · 06/15/07, 9:56 PM

Originally Posted by Praetorian

We bring them because paladins up to 3 offer huge raid benefits, and because what paladins do best is heal.

Which seems like another way of saying that you wouldn't bring any paladins at all to a raid right now if they didn't have a blessing apiece stapled to them.

Which sounds about right, but which is obviously a downer if you happen to be a paladin.

♦ Praetorian · 06/15/07, 10:04 PM

And I wouldn't bring shamans if they didn't have totems.

...so?

But uh, they're support classes. That's kind of the point.

NicotineJones · 06/15/07, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by Praetorian

And I wouldn't bring shamans if they didn't have totems.

...so?

But uh, they're support classes. That's kind of the point.

Okay, let's try a thought-experiment for either then.

How bad would paladins (or shammies) have to be at their raid roles before you would no longer bring them for blessings (or totems)?

Is the raid utility of either class so completely bound up in the buffs they bring-- gear-independent, largely spec-independent, and largely skill-independent-- that you'd still be willing to bring them to BT over t5 members of other classes if they were in 5-man blues?

If so, that seems like a balance issue.

Jebraltar · 06/15/07, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by NicotineJones

How bad would paladins (or shammies) have to be at their raid roles before you would no longer bring them for blessings (or totems)?

How bad would Priests have to be at their raid roles before you would no longer bring at least one for Fortitude? Or a healing priest for Imp. Divine Spirit?

Buffs are an enormous benefit to the entire raid - in some cases, encounters are specifically balanced around them - some bosses would literally one-shot your tanks without thenm. It's natural that classes oriented around buffs are going to be less gear-dependent. That doesn't mean that the third or fourth Paladin is going to be comparable to that Priest for actual healing - it means that you're probably gonna take at least one or two for Salvation/Kings and Wisdom/Might on everybody. It doesn't even mean that the Paladin is filling the raid slot as effectively as the Priest would - merely that the encounter is not meant to be done without the buff. Having an ineffective healer sucks. Having your tank lose over a thousand hitpoints can ruin you. Having your DPS lose their threat buffer (or their DPS buffs) can ruin you. This is a choice between buffing everyone and buffing one person - usually, buffing everybody wins.

NicotineJones · 06/16/07, 12:04 AM

Originally Posted by Jebraltar

How bad would Priests have to be at their raid roles before you would no longer bring at least one for Fortitude? Or a healing priest for Imp. Divine Spirit?

Pretty bad. But to some extent, you *want* diversity of synergies to be a selling point-- that's how class and spec diversity is enforced.

The point is that classes should be able to contribute (hopefully, near-equally) over and above the buffs they bring to the table just by showing up.

It seems to me that there's also a difference between carrying your one token guy who's specced for raid synergy-- pre-2.1 survival hunters, deep arms warriors-- and your entire token class.

Symbul · 06/16/07, 1:12 AM

Isn't this really the crux of why holy priests are upset at paladins? 3 paladins = 3 blessings. Most raid leaders really want these 3 blessings and will sub-out players regardless. Perhaps blizzard should look into either getting 3 blessings out of 2 paladins or just max out the number of blessings a person can have at 2.

So most guilds only bring 1 or 2, Holy Priests but what is the problem with that? Aren't they bringing at least 2 Shadow Priests to that mix as well? Is Holy Priest now a class on its own, but [dps tree] Shamans for example aren't? Seems silly to me.

HPS and HPM aside, a Paladin cannot heal like a Priest can. No insane PoM jumps, no PoH, no Renew, no PW:Shield (however badly it scales it's still useful), etc. There's something to be said for having more than two varieties of the same kind of heal.

Linnet · 06/16/07, 2:10 AM

Originally Posted by NicotineJones

The point is that classes should be able to contribute (hopefully, near-equally) over and above the buffs they bring to the table just by showing up.

Not really. The point is that all classes should bring similar utility when considered as an overall package. That includes whatever buffs they bring to the table, as well as fulfilling their main role/s.

Clearly buffing is a pretty static playstyle in itself, but if a class performed its raid role better than a non buffing class AND had awesome raid buffs to bring to the table then the total package is clearly much higher in utility than the non-buffing class. Which is nicely circular because I guess it's what holy priests are concerned about.

NicotineJones · 06/16/07, 3:21 AM

Originally Posted by Linnet

Not really. The point is that all classes should bring similar utility when considered as an overall package. That includes whatever buffs they bring to the table, as well as fulfilling their main role/s.

Clearly buffing is a pretty static playstyle in itself, but if a class performed its raid role better than a non buffing class AND had awesome raid buffs to bring to the table then the total package is clearly much higher in utility than the non-buffing class. Which is nicely circular because I guess it's what holy priests are concerned about.

The first member of every class besides rogue (and possibly hunter) brings at least one excellent buff or debuff with them.

I guess you could make the case that when measuring buff power you should start counting at the second member of a class, or the third, or the fourth, but you can't balance around buff power without making a bunch of assumptions about raid composition already.

Linnet · 06/16/07, 3:35 AM

Originally Posted by NicotineJones

The first member of every class besides rogue (and possibly hunter) brings at least one excellent buff or debuff with them.

I guess you could make the case that when measuring buff power you should start counting at the second member of a class, or the third, or the fourth, but you can't balance around buff power without making a bunch of assumptions about raid composition already.

Yup. But this is the reason that people are saying 'we must bring three paladins'. So it's going to affect raid composition in any case.

Don't get me wrong, pallies are great healers and the blessings of protection etc are great. But it's the buffs that dictate how you'd want to make up an ideal raid composition. If one person could cast all the buffs, it would allow more flexibility.

Mirai · 06/16/07, 3:46 AM

Phew..

I don't think anyone would take a paladin over another healer if he didn't have any blessings.

Blessings are the whole point of paladin raiding, as are totems and shamans

You don't bring them for their healing power really. They can do their job and no ones dies, but its not particularly shiny.

When I look at the Relinquary of Souls encounter I can hear someone scream " More holy priests" :>

Floria · 06/16/07, 6:15 AM

Originally Posted by tunah

Sorry, I said prot was not currently considered a raid role for paladins, thought it went without saying that ret wasn't either.

But a lot of people here are saying that "2nd Holy Priest" isn't considered a raid role either. Do you see where your logic is going circular?

People roll a "Priest" expecting to be able to heal, so therefore they should be allowed to by their guild and by game mechanics, but rolling a "Paladin" expecting to protect one's allies (Prot) or swing a mighty hammer (Ret) is strictly forbidden?

Bokchoy · 06/16/07, 6:53 AM

Hypothetical situation:

Suppose you had 3 blessings, 3 sets of totems, 2 battle rezzes and a DS, regardless how how many of each healer you brought to a raid. How many of each healer would you bring?

I'm not sure what I'd do, but I know I'd have at least 2 Priests.

tiberion02 · 06/16/07, 7:14 AM

Originally Posted by Bokchoy

Hypothetical situation:

Suppose you had 3 blessings, 3 sets of totems, 2 battle rezzes and a DS, regardless how how many of each healer you brought to a raid. How many of each healer would you bring?

I'm not sure what I'd do, but I know I'd have at least 2 Priests.

It would be alot like 40 man raiding, where overall buffing wasnt really paid attention to since there were so many people to fulfill that role.

You'd be top-heavy with Priests and Druids. In an 8 healer raid, I'd prolly expect 2 Holy Priest, 4 Druids (mmmm, HoT'd tanks), 0 Paladin and 2 Shaman. Obviously, shamans for raidwide damage via chainhealing, Druids for the most part on the MT, and the 2 priests being very adaptable, on OTs or other raid damage.

Thats a really good hypothetical.