[WOTLK 4.0] Restoration Discussion - Page 12

Arentios · 08/31/10, 9:07 AM

Originally Posted by Erdluf

Regrowth: 60% less HoT healing, but 70% less duration means the ticks should be slightly stronger (if the per-tick coefficient stayed about the same). If the 60% Regrowth crit bonus applies to the HoT, even better.

Lifebloom: At 10s duration, using a 2s Nourish to Refresh Lifebloom every 10s is significantly less of an "intrusion" to whatever other healing you are responsible for.

Revitalize: The word "crit" is no longer mentioned, so you're not looking at nested chances. Still, it is probably weaker than before, unless Rejuv gets a lot more use than I expect.

In a tank healing scenario Revitalize will still proc more or less on cooldown via Lifebloom, especially given how fast Lifebloom tics with haste. Even just keeping a single stack on the tank will ensure rapid proccing.

The Furor/Heart change seems aimed at Moonkins/Ferals. We'll still pick up both, but now Moonkin probably won't put points into Feral assuming the plan of DPS having essentially unlimited mana pans out.

Fallenangel · 08/31/10, 9:21 AM

Revitalize change seems like a wash. Changing Regrowth for Rejuv is not significant because the main proc chance for this ability comes from LB anyway. If anything I'd expect more Rejuv ticks. Switching crit/100% with all-ticks/24% is also a wash as 24% seems like a high crit%, certainly when the gear level is low (which is when you need regen the most). This ability is still very potent.
The change to LB to 10s is most welcome. Nourish is not 2s but 2.5s base - if you're factoring in haste then it would also effect the time used to refresh LB "manually".
Talent changes in general are disappointing. Nothing was done to reduce the immense bloat within the resto tree. Furor feels too strong to ignore but competes too strongly with what also feels like mandatory talents in T2 of balance. Best option right now seems like 8/2/31.

Arentios · 08/31/10, 9:37 AM

There are a few under the radar changes:

Nature's Majesty affecting all spells means HoTs should also have a +4% crit chance.
Innervate being reduced is around 8k less mana at 83, or 222mp5, a number that will scale with level/gear. Should note that Paladins got an even larger hit to Divine Plea, and Hymn of Hope was also reduced.

Furor v. Moonglow will be dependent on max mana/gear level. After a point the mana increase combined with replenishment/innervate may make it worth more, or it may never be worth more, or it may start out worth more. We won't know precisely until we know the maximum mana versus base mana at 85 for raiding.

E: And also remember that this build hasn't even been deployed, so it may not be a full/final build. Illumination is gone entirely for Paladins, which feels unintentional if there's no replacement.

ttyl · 08/31/10, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by Arentios

Innervate being reduced is around 8k less mana at 83, or 222mp5, a number that will scale with level/gear. Should note that Paladins got an even larger hit to Divine Plea, and Hymn of Hope was also reduced.

And also remember that this build hasn't even been deployed, so it may not be a full/final build. Illumination is gone entirely for Paladins, which feels unintentional if there's no replacement.

Shadowfiend restores less mana now, too. So Priests may have lost as much mana regen as Divine Plea nerf + no Illumination. Also, Holy Paladins got 2 new mandatory talents for 5 points total. Seems very possible Illumination is gone for good.

For us, this makes the new Moonglow more attractive.

Shelendil · 09/01/10, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by Erdluf

Regrowth: 60% less HoT healing, but 70% less duration means the ticks should be slightly stronger (if the per-tick coefficient stayed about the same). If the 60% Regrowth crit bonus applies to the HoT, even better.

This could affect swiftmend as well. Since the regrowth hot is so much shorter than rejuv, swiftmend will almost always choose the regrowth, and swiftmend size from regrowth currently is less than from rejuv. Does this still hold true in beta?

Arentios · 09/01/10, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by Shelendil

This could affect swiftmend as well. Since the regrowth hot is so much shorter than rejuv, swiftmend will almost always choose the regrowth, and swiftmend size from regrowth currently is less than from rejuv. Does this still hold true in beta?

The current Beta version of Swiftmend heals for a flat amount, it's not based on whether it's Swiftmend/Regrowth on the target and no longer references duration. It's just "Consumes a Rejuvenation or Regrowth effect on a friendly target to instantly heal the target for X."

Playered · 09/01/10, 1:52 PM

Originally Posted by Arentios

The current Beta version of Swiftmend heals for a flat amount, it's not based on whether it's Swiftmend/Regrowth on the target and no longer references duration. It's just "Consumes a Rejuvenation or Regrowth effect on a friendly target to instantly heal the target for X."

He means the way it consumes the one with the lowest duration not the amount it heals.

Arentios · 09/01/10, 1:58 PM

Originally Posted by Playered

He means the way it consumes the one with the lowest duration not the amount it heals.

He asked both:

...and swiftmend size from regrowth currently is less than from rejuv. Does this still hold true in beta?

In the previous build it was still taking the lower duration of the two, and Glyph of Swiftmend was not functioning.

As something of a raid healing note, Efflorescence is/was not considered an HoT for Nourish purposes, as it does not apply a buff, it's basically identical to a healing void zone, complete with invisible mob.

Fallenangel · 09/01/10, 4:32 PM

Consuming Regrowth over Rejuv is a positive since the hot is much weaker.
That said, SM really needs some love. Requiring a hot is fine under the blanketing paradigm back not when hots are expensive and have short duration. The CD is also too long. Looking at all the interactions HS has is a nice what-could-have-been.

Lightflower · 09/01/10, 7:34 PM

I just can't see SM being used as a clutch heal for raid damage scenarios unless blanketing makes a resurgence. That said, there's absolutely nothing at all wrong with its utility as a large, instant tank saving heal - assuming the SM glyph survives, it allows us to put that heal out without unduly sacrificing overall HPS. That's a specific contrast to HS which is rarely used by tank healing Paladins.

So we have a tank healing toolkit of Nourish and LB as normal with RJ & SM for intense situations. Raid healing will probably move more towards RG and WG since RJ blanketing just won't be optimal. Obviously this seems like a weak raid healing toolkit compared to the current style of encounters where tanks are often assigned only one healer.

Consider a shift away from massive raid damage to more targeted attacks and more zone type attacks which require people to dodge. Add more tank damage to divert more healing away from pre-emptive raid maintenance and suddenly the toolkit we have doesn't look overly weak at all. We'd still be more mobile than other healers, more able to divert a GCD or two to switch off a tank to help raid heal and we have the ability to make zones of 'safety' after people move which will rapidly top a small group up.

I don't know what the raid encounters will be like, I'm not sure any player does right now. What I do know though is that Druids have been superb raid healers this expansion because of the prevalence of aura type fights and the ability to blanket the raid. Change that mechanic and there's no way we'd beat out the smart heals of other classes.

This leads me to think we'll play a hybrid healer role pushing us more towards a TBC playstyle (without the LB rolling on 4 tanks).

Rijndael · 09/01/10, 10:35 PM

Originally Posted by Lightflower

What I do know though is that Druids have been superb raid healers this expansion because of the prevalence of aura type fights and the ability to blanket the raid. Change that mechanic and there's no way we'd beat out the smart heals of other classes.

This leads me to think we'll play a hybrid healer role pushing us more towards a TBC playstyle (without the LB rolling on 4 tanks).

Good exercise: of encounters we saw in ICC, which would favor healing zones? Here's the breakdown, where possible answers are "yes, no, only on tanks":

Marrowgar (only on tanks, blender phase everyone moves too much, tank/spank phase no one takes non-trivial damage except tanks)
LDW (no, too much movement)
Saurfang (people have to spread out, no real raid damage)
Rotface (no, ranged have to spread, melee don't take damage)
Festergut (yes, on melee group because of the aura)
Putricide (no, too much movement)
Princes (no, damage always coupled with movement)
BQ (yes, on melee group because of the aura, also on tanks)
Valithria (no, tank rotation on dragon, too much movement if put on raid)
Sindragosa (yes, both melee and ranged groups)
LK (no, except possibly relentless winter phase, which isn't the hard part)

As you can see, unless Cata encounters will be drastically different from what we saw before, most fights won't really favor healing zones except in stationary fights with auras or other reliable damage sources. Most of the time the zone will be useful on tanks or melee. In 3 fights out of 11 we could make use of zones in a useful way on raid, in 1 out of 11 we can use it on the tank clump. This isn't enough to roster us as full time raid healers. Our TBC playstyle _was_ LB rolling. Without that we just get put on one tank unless something about a fight makes healing zones super strong. That's a pretty lame position to be in, but there you go. Perhaps Blizzard's design goal for healing in Cata is that healers get swapped to raid based on encounter mechanics which favor their toolkit. If that's the case, I have to second Lightflower's comment, zones + WG can't compete with the versatility of other healers' raid toolkits.

Fallenangel · 09/02/10, 4:10 AM

Originally Posted by Lightflower

I just can't see SM being used as a clutch heal for raid damage scenarios unless blanketing makes a resurgence. That said, there's absolutely nothing at all wrong with its utility as a large, instant tank saving heal - assuming the SM glyph survives, it allows us to put that heal out without unduly sacrificing overall HPS. That's a specific contrast to HS which is rarely used by tank healing Paladins.

So the resto druid signature / spec ability is a tank healing on a longish CD (for a single target heal) that requires a glyph which may not even exist anymore to work properly? I don't want to sacrifice a glyph just to make an already hard to use spell slightly more useable.
Not sure why you're saying HS is rarely used a tank heal. It is at a use-me-whenever state right now since it creates holy power (2 if used on a beaconed tank) and procs cast-time reductions so it's a good opener for a string of heals.
I'm not sure if it's intended but currently druids are shaping up to be using high mana cost spells which is enabled by a very strong regen ability - Revitalize, which is strong by itself and is aided by 2 mana increasing talents. I'm not sure if that's the model they want or can balance around, and any change to Revitalize will hurt badly. Regrowth is the major benefactor from this, for now.
I don't see why you think druids are more mobile than holy priests. They have Renew to our Rejuv, PW:S to SM, CoH to WoG. In addition they have PoM, an instant heal on 15/20s CD in 2/3 of their Chakra forms and Desperate Prayer for self healing.

Arythorn · 09/02/10, 10:41 AM

Had some folks tool around with Regrowth / Effloresence effect (with the new lower cast time). I was on the fence about the 15 yd to 4 yd reduction on Eff. I absolutely think 15 yds was overkill but 4 seemed tight. I still think 5 or 6 would be a good middle ground but with the new lower cast time on Regrowth it's starting to get interesting:

1 target:

At first glance, 4 yd radius seems a bit tight but at 1.5 second cast (pre-haste effects) you can pretty quickly get to:

3 targets:

And in Go go gadget TreeSPAM!! form Regrowth becomes instant cast (given the lower cast time of Regrowth, we may / probably will get it down to 1.0 second cast with haste in Cata so I'm not sure how strong the benefit of instant cast is in tree form but that's another topic):

I'm not sure if that is the final graphic or not -- doesn't seem to fit the "bed of healing flora" description so it may be a placeholder. I want roses everywhere come Cata!! That's the OOC clearcasting in-game power aura btw. Whatever the case, looks like Blizz is definitely pulling out all the stops to retool Regrowth into a spell we pull out of the bag far more often. It's definitely getting interesting.

Whitefyst · 09/02/10, 7:14 PM

Originally Posted by Rijndael

Good exercise: of encounters we saw in ICC, which would favor healing zones? Here's the breakdown, where possible answers are "yes, no, only on tanks":

Marrowgar (only on tanks, blender phase everyone moves too much, tank/spank phase no one takes non-trivial damage except tanks)
LDW (no, too much movement)
Saurfang (people have to spread out, no real raid damage)
Rotface (no, ranged have to spread, melee don't take damage)
Festergut (yes, on melee group because of the aura)
Putricide (no, too much movement)
Princes (no, damage always coupled with movement)
BQ (yes, on melee group because of the aura, also on tanks)
Valithria (no, tank rotation on dragon, too much movement if put on raid)
Sindragosa (yes, both melee and ranged groups)
LK (no, except possibly relentless winter phase, which isn't the hard part)

I have to disagree a little with this concerning healing zones. However, my criteria is less of favoring healing zones and more of where they can be utilized or possibly taken advantage of if you are casting Regrowth anyway.

Marrowgar: There is no reason the raid or range (or groups of the range) cannot group up outside the "blender" phase, and a lot of strategies call for it. Although it is true that the raid takes little damage during the tank and spank phases, it is usually true that a lot of people have damage to be healed up coming out of the blender. A healing zone or two can be the place the range/raid groups up so that they can get the benefit.

LDW: Depending on strategy, role, or class, there can be a lot of movement on this fight, but there can also not be that much. As range DPS (on hunter or moonkin), I do not have to move much in phase 1. In 10-man, I only move enough to help DPS as the waves come out on either side and then am stationary until need to move again. In 25-man, I just stay mostly in a location where I can DPS the adds on my side and LDW and only move to get out of void zones. As a healer, I position myself where I can heal who I am responsible for and stay roughly in the center with moving very little as needed. Hence, in that phase, if a healing zone exists nearby and I am low in health, it is not difficult to move into for a few ticks. Even in phase 2 with all the movement, there are still times you stop to attack. If there is an available healing zone in a safe area nearby when I need to move, I do not see why I wouldn't go into it to get a tick until I need to move again or it ends.

Rotface: There are plenty of times during this fight where raid members are relatively close and could take advantage of a healing zone until something forces them to move.

Festergut: Groups stack together to get spores and could take advantage of a healing zone then. If you have people assigned to whom the spore group always collapses too, that person can have the healing zone cast on them.

Putricide: True that this is a large movement fight, but there are also times when you are not moving and attacking. If there is a healing zone down in a safe area around where I am or am moving to, I can always step in it for some ticks if I need healing.

Valithria: Another movement fight but one where ranged can possibly move into nearby healing zones.

Lightflower · 09/02/10, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by Rijndael

As you can see, unless Cata encounters will be drastically different from what we saw before, most fights won't really favor healing zones except in stationary fights with auras or other reliable damage sources. Most of the time the zone will be useful on tanks or melee. In 3 fights out of 11 we could make use of zones in a useful way on raid, in 1 out of 11 we can use it on the tank clump. This isn't enough to roster us as full time raid healers. Our TBC playstyle _was_ LB rolling. Without that we just get put on one tank unless something about a fight makes healing zones super strong. That's a pretty lame position to be in, but there you go. Perhaps Blizzard's design goal for healing in Cata is that healers get swapped to raid based on encounter mechanics which favor their toolkit. If that's the case, I have to second Lightflower's comment, zones + WG can't compete with the versatility of other healers' raid toolkits.

I may not have expressed my point correctly and I apologise. What I was trying to get across is that I agree that healing zones in current content would be fairly pathetic.

What I was also trying to get across is an imaginary scenario where a much larger proportion of healing needed to go onto a tank than what is currently the norm. Consider a fight similar to the end stages of Thorim HM in Ulduar (except we'll imagine that Sif doesn't do her Frost Nova so much or at all). The tank damage is extreme and requires 2 or perhaps even 3 healers to cope with it. Raid damage is high but predictable and there are compelling reasons why limited clumping is favoured in some scenarios. In such a fight, tank healing abilities with throwaway raid stabilisation with a positional requirement become good.

Wall of text I know, but several other fights fit the bill: Kalecgos (both realms), Brutallus, portions of Kil'jaeden, Illidari Council (place the zone after people move out of blizzard etc), Karathress, Anetheron and Loatheb. In addition, several fights have raid damage but support clumping: Mimiron p2 (several small camps of players), Freya, Iron Council HM and Auriaya.

The key thing to remember is that the expectation won't be to heal people to full instantly. Under that scenario, we'll be taking the Efflorescence patch into account when we cast Regrowth and it may just work out to a positional HoT.

So the resto druid signature / spec ability is a tank healing on a longish CD (for a single target heal) that requires a glyph which may not even exist anymore to work properly? I don't want to sacrifice a glyph just to make an already hard to use spell slightly more useable.
I don't see why you think druids are more mobile than holy priests. They have Renew to our Rejuv, PW:S to SM, CoH to WoG. In addition they have PoM, an instant heal on 15/20s CD in 2/3 of their Chakra forms and Desperate Prayer for self healing.

This is almost pure "grass is greener" syndrome.

- everyone needs glyphs to make their abilities work properly. SM is not special in that regard. It is like a Shaman complaining that they have to glyph for 4% LB damage or Paladins having to glyph for extra Beacon duration. The spell works without the glyph, it works much better with it

- Swiftmend isn't hard to use, it's a 2 step decision making process. The change away from blanketing means that it won't be our clutch raid heal anymore which is why RG has been pumped up quite a bit. The same 2 step decision process is required not to waste a GCD attempting to shield a target with Weakened Soul or required to use or consume a Riptide for Chain Heal

- I'm not sure why it's a problem to have an iconic ability on cooldown modified by a glyph. It's substantially similar to Penance and Desperate Prayer in that respect

- Finally, the issue is not whether Druids or H Priests have more mobility. The issue is that both are substantially more mobile than other healers