[Paladin] Holy raid itemization for best performance - Page 2

ariesz · 01/30/08, 4:09 PM

Stacking Healing : Raw HPS
Stacking mp5: Raw Regen
Stacking Crit: Mix of both (HPS/Regen)
Stacking Int: Longevity

galzohar · 01/30/08, 6:50 PM

I see no difference between mp5 and mana portion of int. They both give you a certain pre-determined amount of mana over a given fight. The only difference between the 2 is that one varies based on fight length and the other does not. Plus int has small +healing and crit bonuses that while aren't much, aren't neglicible either.

As for critting HL5 you're using a slower cast time spell with lower HPS with much higher mana cost and lower HP/mana. The only difference in crit chance between HL5 and maxFoL is 6%, rest of your HL crit also applies to your FoL. Do the math and see that even if you count crit as HPS, HL5 flat out loses to maxFoL on EVERYTHING. These kinds of posts are exactly why a spreadsheet is needed. You crit stacking is actually pretty weak as well and hurts your mana efficiency more than it helps due to how much healing (and possibly mp5) you're losing for it, which just isn't worth it if you actually do the math.

I've yet to see a single person advocate crit stacking AND having the math to back it up. Probably because such math does not exist, although if I'm wrong I'd love to be proved wrong. However rank5 HL spamming will not do any good for your cause, since it's inferior to maxFoL in every single way.

If you're spamming low rank HLs as a way of healing you have obviously not read the post and if you did you definitely didn't do any math whatsoever. It's like that mage/lock stacking crit becuase "crits is teh good dps!" especially affliction warlocks that think they need the crit to up their ISB time and seem to "forget" all the spell dmg (and dps) they lose in the process. At the end, if you want to convince anyone you're right, please have something to back it up other than "I do it and it works" or "I don't live in the MC days" (with a T2-geared pally avatar if I may add).

Heysues · 01/31/08, 1:58 AM

Originally Posted by galzohar

I see no difference between mp5 and mana portion of int. They both give you a certain pre-determined amount of mana over a given fight. The only difference between the 2 is that one varies based on fight length and the other does not. Plus int has small +healing and crit bonuses that while aren't much, aren't neglicible either.

As for critting HL5 you're using a slower cast time spell with lower HPS with much higher mana cost and lower HP/mana. The only difference in crit chance between HL5 and maxFoL is 6%, rest of your HL crit also applies to your FoL. Do the math and see that even if you count crit as HPS, HL5 flat out loses to maxFoL on EVERYTHING. These kinds of posts are exactly why a spreadsheet is needed. You crit stacking is actually pretty weak as well and hurts your mana efficiency more than it helps due to how much healing (and possibly mp5) you're losing for it, which just isn't worth it if you actually do the math.

I've yet to see a single person advocate crit stacking AND having the math to back it up. Probably because such math does not exist, although if I'm wrong I'd love to be proved wrong. However rank5 HL spamming will not do any good for your cause, since it's inferior to maxFoL in every single way.

If you're spamming low rank HLs as a way of healing you have obviously not read the post and if you did you definitely didn't do any math whatsoever. It's like that mage/lock stacking crit becuase "crits is teh good dps!" especially affliction warlocks that think they need the crit to up their ISB time and seem to "forget" all the spell dmg (and dps) they lose in the process. At the end, if you want to convince anyone you're right, please have something to back it up other than "I do it and it works" or "I don't live in the MC days" (with a T2-geared pally avatar if I may add).

I have to say that your post is an extreme waste of time to read, and due to the spelling and grammar it is painfull at best to try to understand what point your trying to get across. I would list your points and attack them, but again, it would be a waste of my time because without a spreadsheet I doubt I would get an intellegent response.

Oh and the T2 pally avatar has nothing to do with "the MC days", If you were a old school paladin you would know that the set was pretty crappy but its looked better than anything we have ever had, and probably will have.

flyingtoastr · 01/31/08, 3:15 AM

Judgement is the only good looking set we've had (Lightbringer is okay I suppose). Once in a while its worth just throwing it and my Ashkandi on and RP walking around IF like the good old days. That is really off topic though.

As as much as you argue the efficiency argument, being at 89% mana when everyone else goes OOM doesn't help any when your tank is dead. Efficiency matters on paper only, in the real world unless you seriously outgear an encounter you can chain-chug to make up almost any mana loss. I'll bite though.

I'll say it again, HL builds might not provide the pure efficiency of FoL spambots, but they make up for it in flexability. Light's Grace is always up so you can react quickly with your DF + HL XI macro, if someone is 2.5k down you don't have to use FoL twice to top them off (which incidentally results in lowered effective HPS) but just 1 Rank V or VI, etcetera.

You asked for math, so here is a little tidbit. This is pure theorycraft, so of course everything is ideal.

Assuming 2000 healing, no set bonuses other than 6% HL crit, typical 42/19/0 spec, BoL on target, 29% paper doll holy crit.

In 100 casts your FoL will crit 29 times.

Flash of Light VII

Average: 1710
Average crit: 2565
Mana from Illumination: 3132
Mp5 from Illumination: 104.4
Total Healed: 195795
Total HPS: 1305.3

100 casts for Holy Light V with 40 crits.

Holy Light V

Average: 1919
Average crit: 2878
Mana from Illumination: 6600
Mp5 from Illumination: 165
Total Healed: 230260
Total HPS: 1151.3

So now we can look at costs. We're going to look at the base cost of the spell (I will be including [Libram of Absolute Truth] for HL costs because yes, its that important to the build), find the effective Mp5 lost, factor in Mp5 gained from Illumination, then compare the ratio of HPS to Mp5.

Still using the same factors, and still 100 casts.

Flash of Light VII

Cost: 180
Total mana spent: 18000
Mp5 spent: 600
Mp5 from llumination: 104.4
Effective Mp5 loss: 495.6

Holy Light V

Cost: 248
Total mana spent: 24800
Mp5 spent: 620
Mp5 from Illumination: 165
Effective Mp5 loss: 455

Look at the HPS:Cost ratios for the two spells.

FoL VII: 1305.3 : 495.6 ~ 2.634
HL V: 1151.3 : 445 ~ 2.587

You are not losing much by downranking. Not anywhere near as much as you seem to think.

I'll do more later.

D077Z · 01/31/08, 2:04 PM

How is that a remotely fair comparison? By taking gear that clearly favors holy light (low healing hight crit no 4pc t6 ect) and not doing basic things like equipping a libram for holy light you essentially invalidate your results. Even just adding souls redeemed and 4pc t6 changes the FoL math to

In 100 casts your FoL will crit 29 times.
Incorrect math scroll down.
Flash of Light VII

Average: 1815
Average crit: 2722.5
Mana from Illumination: 3132
Mp5 from Illumination: 104.4
Total Healed: 195795
Total HPS: 1385.45

FoL VII: 1385.45 : 495.6 ~ 2.955 (a ~8% increase in efficiency without any form of gear change (bar libram and 4pc))

Also the FoL builds increased healing actually makes it better for reacting to burst as the HL+ DF macro will hit hard and Lights Grace should be up regardless.

Above maths was incorrect below contains the correct numbers.

Average: Average: 1906
Average crit: 2858.6
Mana from Illumination: 3132
Mp5 from Illumination: 104.4
Total Healed: 218225
Total HPS: 1454.7225

FoL VII: 1454.7225 : 495.6 ~ 2.94 (13% Increase)

galzohar · 01/31/08, 2:22 PM

Your math still shows you're using more mana for doing less HPS. I just don't see the point. If you want to keep LG up keep it up with a once-in-15-seconds holy light to minimize the waste...

I mean if you'd claim efficiency doesn't matter and use higher ranks that actually have any real HPS advantage over FoL to justify the efficiency loss you'd have a point. But then you'd probably still do better flash spamming most of the time and HL9/11 when it really matters, over using mid/low-rank HLs all the time.

Even with your numbers HL5 isn't worth it, and you didn't even consider that you should probably be using libram of souls redeemed anyway. Also you're completely ignoring the overhealing of crits, however that wouldn't make nearly noticeable difference, at least nothing near the difference a libram would make.

I see no justification for spamming low rank HL as your main heal except the "I can't keep an eye up on LG" excuse. Low rank HL right as it's about to fall off (or even a slightly higher rank right after it fell off if you messed up) is much more efficient than spamming rank5 HL and will provide more HPS as well.

Bottom line even with gear that favors holy light your HL strategy loses. Heck FoL gearing standards will probably be better for HL spamming than blindly stacking crit.

Karakas · 01/31/08, 2:57 PM

Since the nerf to Paladin 4-piece T5, there really is no reason to spam low rank Holy Lights. As the math suggests, max-rank Flash of Light is essentially better than any low-mid rank Holy Light in terms of HPS and efficiency. Keeping up Light's Grace is really not a difficult task.

Endoscient · 01/31/08, 3:17 PM

Originally Posted by flyingtoastr

So now we can look at costs. We're going to look at the base cost of the spell (I will be including [Libram of Absolute Truth] for HL costs because yes, its that important to the build), find the effective Mp5 lost, factor in Mp5 gained from Illumination, then compare the ratio of HPS to Mp5.

One thing you are losing is a Libram for FoL. You account for HL5 using a Libram and find FoL with no Libram is better in every way. With [Libram of Souls Redeemed] FoL becomes even more HPS for lower mana.

Also even if you are mainly using FoL, you should still use HL5 (to keep up LG) and HL11 (or maybe like 9) when the burst is needed. You are severely limiting your potential if you don't. Part of the advantage (in my view at least) with high Healing FoL spam, you have a lot more mana to throw in the Holy Lights when they are needed.

flyingtoastr · 01/31/08, 3:38 PM

Originally Posted by D077Z

How is that a remotely fair comparison? By taking gear that clearly favors holy light (low healing hight crit no 4pc t6 ect) and not doing basic things like equipping a libram for holy light you essentially invalidate your results. Even just adding souls redeemed and 4pc t6 changes the FoL math to
In 100 casts your FoL will crit 29 times.

Flash of Light VII

Average: 1815
Average crit: 2722.5
Mana from Illumination: 3132
Mp5 from Illumination: 104.4
Total Healed: 195795
Total HPS: 1385.45

FoL VII: 1385.45 : 495.6 ~ 2.955 (a ~8% increase in efficiency without any form of gear change (bar libram))

Also the FoL builds increased healing actually makes it better for reacting to burst as the HL+ DF macro will hit hard and Lights Grace should be up regardless.

And you just did the same exact thing. By swapping your gear to things that favor FoL you are guilty of the exact same crime you blame me for, favoring your build. What lesson can we learn from this?

How you choose pieces and gem your gear is the only variable.

You can make gear sets effective for HL downranking and you can make gear sets for FoL. They will be drastically different. Its like trying to compare gear for an Affliction Lock versus a Shadowbolt Destro Lock. The stats that are deemed valuable for one aren't great for the other and vice versa. That is why its impossible to give a true comparison between the two different builds. HL builds will value crit greatly, FoL spambots will ninja the guild's supply of Spinels for 22 healing gems in every socket. You can't get an accurate comparison between the two because their gearing choices are so different.

Both FoL spambots and HL downranking are effective. I've beaten the game doing both, just as nearly everyone here has. Does one give you a slight edge on paper, sure. But paper and real game are two terribly different things, and trying to even begin comparing the two is such an exercise in futility. HL downranking can't be determined on paper since you don't spam 1 rank and the usage of each rank varies depending on incoming damage. FoL overheal due to pure spamming is also never taken into account.

Healing is not like DPS. You can't make a simple sweeping "this is the only thing to do with this socket and this enchant using this rank for everything". Healing is dynamic. The damage an assignment is taking changes from fight to fight, from attempt to attempt. All this spreadsheet stuff really doesn't apply in the real game. Your only priority is to keep your assignment alive. If you run out of mana before the fight is done you did something wrong and there is a problem with your healing/itemization. If you let someone die you did something wrong and there is a problem with your healing/itemization. Otherwise you are fine. That is what matters, not which will give you marginally more HPS in an ideal situation.

When the shit hits the fan I would rather have my guaranteed LG than maybe have a chance of missing a downrank to keep it up. But that is my playstyle, and I am as entitled to it just as much as you are to yours. As long as you're effective at your job it doesn't matter what you're doing.

galzohar · 01/31/08, 4:04 PM

In fact there isn't much difference in itemization to favor HL vs itemization to favor FoL outside of libram choice. The benefit HL gets from crits is marginally higher than the benefit FoL gets from crit (as 6% higher crit makes a neglicible effect on the gains from additional crit) - they both crit for 150% and overheal often on crits (heck, FoL probably has less crit-overheal but let's ignore that as it's not needed to make my point). They both multiply mana cost by (1-0.6c) (again 6% higher crit on HL makes HL scale marginally better with crit). Having double the mana will allow you to heal twice as much with both, and they scale similarly with +healing (in fact, FoL scales its efficiency better with more +healing, while HL scales its HPS better with +healing, but either way it's not far off - this is for max ranks though low rank HLs may scale much worse). I don't see how your massive crit builds are favoring HL. If anything the crit stacking is gimping yourself regardless of wether you spam FoL or HL. Even if crit stacking was worthwhile, it would be about as good for FoL as it is for HL and wouldn't favor HL. The only thing that makes HL scale better with crit is not that it actually scales better with crit, it's that it loses some of the "HPS->MP5" scaling since low ranks are not really much more efficient than max ranks but do a lot less HPS so you can't save as much as you would've by making the conversion into FoL rather than low rank HL.

Bottom line is your gear makes very little difference in terms of "spam low rank HL or max FoL?".

Again I don't see any reason to use low rank HL beyond the "I can't watch my LG timer" excuse.

Just the fact you cleared the game both ways shows that your experience says nothing about which way is more effective. It just means you can be less effective and still finish the game if you know how to move out of the fire and heal the people that are standing in it, regardless of gear. It doesn't mean you know how to gear yourself for a fight that might actually challenge your gear potential, as obviously you claim both ways work while the reality is there is only one best way - as if it isn't the best it means there is another that is better, according to the definition of "best" and "not best". Granted it can be situational, however you can figure out what is "best" for every given situation and reach conclusions, or you could say "hmm it worked I'll stick with it and fuck all theorycraft". I'd rather go with the former than the latter.

Heysues · 01/31/08, 8:27 PM

Your sections on Crit is just to bias. You post a thread called [Paladin] Holy raid itemization for best performance, and then completely trash a stat that a lot of paladin healing and efficency is based upon. I DO NOT rely on crit to save those that I heal. HL ranks 5 and up heal for more than max FoL, so how can you say that crit paladins rely on crits to save thier targets? Crit paladins just take a different view of regen. We take a chance that we will get enough crits to far outstrip the regen that stacking mp5 would have gained us. As a bonus it increases our healing output because 1.5x healing is obviously more healing...

If your going to stand on a soapbox and preach about how a paladin should gear themselves, while you yourself are wearing sub-kara/heroic badge gear, prepare to have allitle resistance. Your views are biased, and tottaly contradictory to mine and, im sure, quite a few others.

D077Z · 01/31/08, 8:29 PM

Originally Posted by flyingtoastr

And you just did the same exact thing. By swapping your gear to things that favor FoL you are guilty of the exact same crime you blame me for, favoring your build. What lesson can we learn from this?
.

1 Libram for each and reasonable set bonuses for gear is "swapping gear to favour FoL"? If I'd redone the HL maths for the different libram this reaction would be warranted.

My maths was fail
Average: Average: 1906
Average crit: 2858.6
Mana from Illumination: 3132
Mp5 from Illumination: 104.4
Total Healed: 218225
Total HPS: 1454.7225

FoL VII: 1454.7225 : 495.6 ~ 2.94 (13% increase)

Bubblemasta · 01/31/08, 8:59 PM

Can someone do a HPS comparison between Paladin FoL and a tree druid fully hotting 1 tank or 3LB/2rejuv on 3 tanks? Every time I FoL spam a tank I feel like I'm trying to be a tree druid with my single target 1.4k HPS (using above figures) hot that I need to be stationary to use.

My opinion of a paladins roll in BC MT healing is to consistently have big heals landing. That way if the tank takes spike damage, big heals (3.5 - 5.7k for HL8 using spreadsheet) are going to land in the worst case after 2s. By far the best way to avoid situation 1: "Maximizing your burst healing ability to minimize possibility of deaths due to excessive damage taken." is for the heal to be half finished when the tank takes the hits. Mana returns from our HL crits is what allows us to do this better and longer then any other class.

Crit difference for HL is 11% (not 6%) for a T6 paladin, which seems to be the level being discussed. 11% is hardly marginal.

Heysues · 01/31/08, 9:08 PM

Ill throw the OP a bone in that I use S3 gloves over T6, so my difference is only 9%.

galzohar · 02/01/08, 7:00 AM

I didn't say 6% and not even 11% is marginal for itself. However the effect it has on how good additional crit has IS marginal. Plus the 11% crit is not enough to make HL more efficient than FoL - not even close if you use a proper libram for FoL.

Fact is if you actually do the math, mp5 will return you more mana than crit if you actually use all your mana (if you don't, why are we even talking about mana? just max your +heal/haste...). Doesn't matter which spell you're casting.

4 mp5 gems still allow you to heal more than 10 crit rating will and so will 22 healing even if you do nothing but spam HL7 for example, unless you assume near-0 crit overhealing, which is not realistic. That is without adding the correction of getting extra mp5 by having more HPS, though, which will increase the value of +healing a lot and increase the value of crit by a little, while keeping mp5 the same. Doing the same math for FoL yields rather similar results regarding how good the stats are.

The only way crit can actually be a good use of the item value with my math is if you estimate your crit overhealing to be near-zero. This just doesn't happen as far as I know, although if you actually find a realistic way to show otherwise (or even find a way to realistically measure how much effective healing you get from crit) I'd love to see it. But assuming any realistic amount of crit-overhealing (say, if on average 1/2 or less of your heals land on a target where a crit would be of no use in terms of extra healing), crit just doesn't match up. It all comes down to measuring the effective healing of crits, though, which I've yet to see anyone suggest an effective way to measure/estimate.