First of thanks for trying to reply to what i asked but i did't want basic info i knew but more of solid answer based on facts if possible

"Go for mastery + spirit in 25 man, never, ever, _ever_ use a spirit flask if you ask me, there's no way you can't handle your mana without it, you need to learn to adapt to different mechanics anyway suiting your playstyle more isn't a viable argument.
"

It contradicts itself ; why ? on one hand you say go for mastery+spirit and on the other hand you saying not to get the spirit flask. The reason for the spirit flask as i explained is when we heal with low number of healers (25man) and because i run with high haste (5730) and mastery (20% right now i need to adjust my gear due to 4set to reach 20% mastery) meaning that my spirit is close to 5k (+- 300). I know that the 1k intellect > 1k spirit for different reasons but in certain cases (like small numbers of healing) i also need to keep my mana in reasonable levels so i dont think trading off 1k int for 1k mana is that bad of a deal (esp if you also run with heart of wild and passive 6%)

Also if crit is overhealing why cant you say that for haste and the extra ticks? The reason we dont buff crit is because we rarely use healing touch and nourish (unless someone has been using healing touch glyph + 4set bonus and is happy with it - Anyone?) and with the regrowth crit we have 100% crit already . This is not the only reason but if we used more of healing touch and nourish then crit would have increase value. (Other reasons also exist but i wont go into them)

I also believe its wrong the way people stack mastery since most of them ignore the total value of it in a raid enviroment . We get 3000 mastery which is 6,25% mastery meaning we should not aim for e.g. 14,1% mastery but for 13,77% and so on. Notice i put the value above a fix number e.g. 14% since i notice that harmony does't record it properly unless its slighty above the % e.g. 14% mastery sometimes shows as 13% harmony and if you add 14,05 it is then showing properly as 14% harmony.

Well with sotf or with tree the result remains we currently dont have enough to compare to other classes unless their quality as players is not good . I also dont agree with the argument

"What do you do when you're in between WG casts and the tank is a little low, or one/few raid members want a little heal? Regrowth them? For me, every time damage starts coming in and I need to output something more than basic HoTs, it's SM first before starting the Regrowths. Would consume far more mana if not for that.
"

The reduce time of swiftmend (4set) is helping making each cast of wild growth to almost sychnonized leaving space for putting down mushrooms if you want or put rejuv to 3 people of your choice. Also while it was proven that wild growth glyph especially for 25man is better without the glyph you can cast a healing touch between sotf wild growth and next swiftmend or if you dont have 4set bonus and using sotf 2 wild growths (unglyph wild growths) alot of combinations (you can fit swiftmend - wild growth(sotf)-wild growth- swiftmend (just on time before sotf proc expires)- wild growth (sotf) )

p.s. i am not attacking you numiro i just dont agree

I do reach the same equation regarding Intellect and Mastery though with some minor tweaks.

Specifically, B/b which is the Base Spell Power / Spell Power Coefficient where 10000 is a good initial value. However, from the data from WoWhead, some of it confirmed via tooltip on Live, a B/b = 10800 would be better suited as an approximation.

EJ's BBCode for tables is broken, thus a list. Spell name, B/b, Range

• Nourish, 10829.80, 7.5%
• Rejuvenation, 10801.02
• Regrowth, 10838.73, 5.5%
• Healing Touch, 10822.58, 8.3%
• Tranquility, 10822.75
• Swiftmend, 10826.36
• Wild Growth, 75326.09
• Lifebloom (HoT), 163421.05

The range is take into account that the average of the min/ max of the spell was taken rather than the extremes. The bulk of our spells will follow the equations made so far, the exceptions will be Wild Growth and Lifebloom which do not benefit as strongly due to lower spellpower contributions.

Note I did not apply the 1.1 spellpower buff to the B/b value because the premature removal of the buff results in a slight miscalculation at dH / dINT.

Where,


Assuming SP,wep to be constant [a reasonable assumption since SP, wep scales off of ilvl rather than INT] the partial wrt INT of equation 4 in the previous post yields


I won't jump to any equations at this juncture, because I came to a problem that eludes me, which is the best way to quantify the relationship between Mastery and Intellect?

Though it would be easy to say 1 INT : 2 Mastery due to gemming that would lead us on the wrong path because gemming does not account for a majority of our available mastery. In this current tier, gemming pure mastery would at most account for 1/3 of our available mastery with the bulk coming from gear / reforges and a percent from enchants.

Then the question becomes what is our contribution from Mastery from gear, a rough 3 INT : 2 Mastery ratio has been observed if the gear already has Mastery as a secondary stat, this ratio further diminishes to roughly 15 INT : 4 Mastery if we are required to reforge Mastery on the gear.

This problem had forced me in previous iterations to stick with a SP to Mastery comparison rather than to complete the analysis in terms of Intellect.

Longer comments will have to wait. Note that WG's base value is an average of 990 per tick, and 0.092*SP per tick, ratio of around 11k. Just looks confusing in spell data because its a weird spell. I assume similar for Lifebloom (on phone right now).

Once the basic math is done you can tweak for any comparison you want, but 2:1 seems most practical since the most common time where you're actually choosing between int and mastery (gems).

I see where my mistake was, I evaluated the total healing vs individual ticks. The B/b line up better now with LB at 10894.74 and WG at 10760.87.

However, I disagree with adding a modifier to the final equation for the 2:1 Gem distribution. Wouldn't it be better to do case comparisons with one we add 160 INT to the SP side, 320 to the MR side, or the 80 INT / 160 side and then weigh the inequalities / equalities?

Will post more thoughts after raid

It's a good point, should include an estimate of that. Can be done without huge complication or imprecision since crit is also a uniform benefit to all spells other than Regrowth. Should still be able to come up with a rule of thumb for what to gem. Anyone looking for something totally precise can always use TreeCalcs, which accounts for the crit already.

I got some new gear and am reforging to get back down close to 3043. The reforge that gets me closest to 3043 has me keeping 755 crit on my staff and moving haste over to mastery. As I use too may Regrowths (we run two disc priests who do an awesome job of blaketing the raid so when someone isn't bubbled they take a big hit - hence the RG), I'd like to know at roughly what base Crit % should we consider dropping the RG glyph for say HT (I estimate I'd get one more SM every 2 min). I thought we'd already discussed (but I couldn't find it) this and dug into the actual numbers.

1000 int is always going to give you more healing then 1000 spirit, gems however make that 2-1 in favour of spirit, so it's 2k spirit vs 1k int, that's the difference. I can't even remember the numbers anymore, it's so long since I even had to argue why it was better with int.

I'm not sure what you're even trying to say, harmony doesn't have soft caps, the buff however doesn't show the decimals, for obvious reasons. If you have 5610 mastery that's going to be 11.69% worth of mastery, not 11 or 12.

Haste is better in my opinion because it's a more benefical way of applying heals then mastery, adding ticks is still going to speed up the former ticks when you reach a soft cap.

I think about it in terms of spell functions. What situation exactly are you casting unglyphed RG in order to solve? In the Cataclysm 3-base heal model, RG is the fast, inefficient heal that you cast when your need to have someone healed up in 1.5s is so great that you are willing to pay for that inefficiency. The problem is of course that RG really doesn't do this very well, as something like 15% of its healing is delayed due to the HoT, and thus not very helpful in getting someone above the damage spike that you expect to occur in a little over 1.5s. The RG glyph is insurance that RG will perform the task I am casting it to perform to the best of its ability 100% of the time, as opposed to performing it well 80% of the time and halfway decently 20% of the time. I wouldn't be inclined to drop this glyph unless I had 40% crit.

Of course then MoP rolls around, and healing spells base crit at 200%, and every meta gem option makes that 206%, and Living Seed goes baseline, and now suddenly you have a situation where RG has to be glyphed in order to perform its function, but if you DO glyph it, it now also performs the functions of Healing Touch and Nourish. Now this is totally devaluing the HT glyph, since HT is now reserved for strange circumstances.

According to some curiosity driven math I did a few weeks ago:

* HT passes Glyphed-RG around 22.7% crit in Raw Healing done and passes it in HPM around 20.5% crit.
* HT doesn't pass Glyphed-RG in HPCT until around 78% crit.
* The two spells scale with SP relatively closely so that SP variation doesn't have much effect.

* Ungylphed-RG (including 6 secs of its HoT) passes Glyphed-RG in HPM/HPS/Raw Healing around 26.8% crit at 31k SP.
* SP/Crit scaling plays a slightly bigger role here, but, at least below 30% crit, it's fairly minor and predictable; the Crit changes very roughly at +.1% per 1k SP (ex: 35k SP requires 27.2% crit for Non-Glyphed RG to pass Glyphed RG).

None of the above accounts for:
- The slowness of RG and HT compared to Glyphed RG (HoT healing and cast time respectively),
- Any loss in secondary stats to reach a given crit percentage.
- Whatever gain some other glyph may confer.
- Potentially unused/useless Living Seeds.
- Extra RG ticks from the HoT being refreshed sub 50%.

---

I agree with the previous analysis that this probably doesn't really matter in practical terms (at least for quite awhile) as there are some serious weaknesses in using in using both Healing Touch and the Non-Glyphed version of Regrowth compared to Glyphed-Regrowth, but this is the kind of information I like to have in the back of my mind.

5.2 PTR: CW is almost doubled in strength. Remains a 30s cooldown, but just two (of three @ 2s each) ticks will be about as strong as a Regrowth or HT (including their LS).

That may actually be a bit large for a spell that requires cast->damage->heal. Nice if the tank gets hit real hard, but if he just gets nibbled on, you'd see a lot of overheal.

If someone is already in a lot of trouble NS+Rg is pretty obvious. You put CW on somebody and he has to survive one more hit before he even starts getting healed.

SoTF 70% change would add 2 more additional ticks to WG from the status quo, an additional 3rd tick for less than an additional 1% haste to either the 3043 or the 6652 breakpoint (estimate 3417, 6822) [Previous WG 12, 13. Post PTR change WG 14, 15]

FoN tooltip (3490+32.3%sp every 3 seconds) is equivalent to non crit 1 RG split as a smart heal among 3 targets every 3 seconds for 15 seconds (4+ possible RG equivalent (depends on spell clipping / scaling to haste))

Cenarion Ward change makes each tick hit as hard as a non crit RG versus the previous non crit Nourish. Mana cost will be a major factor.