The Restoration Itemization Thread for 3.3 - Page 11

ttyl · 02/06/10, 3:21 AM

Trauma +

Originally Posted by http://www.mmo-champion.com/

The rejuvenation procs from the Druid Tier 10 will now work better in a raid group and not avoid targets that have any rejuvenation spell on them though it will continue to avoid targets that have the casting druid’s rejuvenation on them.

= Exciting. Probably won't get good logs until raid reset though... :(

edit: Checked my Sindragosa25 logs from earlier in the week: Had 1 Druid with Rapid Rejuv and 1 Druid without, so all 25 had a Rejuv most of the time. Both Druid's 4set was 6% of their total healing. If it was that significant already... It will be amazing next week?

Norfair · 02/06/10, 5:34 AM

Originally Posted by ttyl

Trauma += Exciting. Probably won't get good logs until raid reset though...

edit: Checked my Sindragosa25 logs from earlier in the week: Had 1 Druid with Rapid Rejuv and 1 Druid without, so all 25 had a Rejuv most of the time. Both Druid's 4set was 6% of their total healing. If it was that significant already... It will be amazing next week?

It seems that Charti was right after all in this post: The Restoration Itemization Thread for 3.3.

Also I updated the first post with the T10 information (also included this new update). I figured it cannot proc on application as we have only 1 report of it happening 1 time, which easily can be a glitch or just human error.

Playered · 02/07/10, 10:57 PM

[Archus, Greatstaff of Antonidas] -> 130 haste instead of crit
[Royal Scepter of Terenas II] -> 60~ haste instead of MP5

This brings our options for weapons up fairly significantly especially now that Trauma has been buffed/fixed too. The staff seems slightly odd considering the BQL one is then an inferior replica but either way considering the situation we had before it is a significant upgrade as a whole.

goodolarchie · 02/08/10, 7:02 AM

The rejuvenation procs from the Druid Tier 10 will now work better in a raid group and not avoid targets that have any rejuvenation spell on them though it will continue to avoid targets that have the casting druid’s rejuvenation on them.

No matter how many times I read this I can't help but feel like this is a bad change for guilds that run 2 trees. If my understanding of the jump mechanic is correct, the priority flowchart goes as
[Player without your Rejuv]
vv
[player without any rejuv] <~ removed
vv
[player with health deficit]
vv
[player at full health]

So assume a raid where only 2 players have a health deficit, rogue at -7k, hunter at -6k. Tree #2 has a rejuv on the rogue.
They've essentially removed #2 from the code so yours will jump to the rogue instead of the hunter, and that's bad because both rejuvs are now more likely to be overhealing, and the hunter is more likely to die. Rejuv is very powerful now, especially hasted, and I find it rare that overlapping rejuvs is better than preferring an un-rejuv'd target with health deficit. If these assumptions are correct (and I don't have a 4pc to test, I use 4t9), then your effective 4t10 healing will go down, because you'll see more overlapping instead of blanket coverage.

Also worth mentioning that Blizzard made changes to 2 LK weapons that make them much more viable for us:

[Royal Scepter of Terenas II] = haste instead of mp5
[Archus, Greatstaff of Antonidas]: = haste instead of crit

(and the non-heroic counterparts)

Playered · 02/08/10, 10:22 AM

That staff has a 3rd (red) socket which wowhead does not show for what it's worth when people are evaluating their weapon choices.

Sekke · 02/08/10, 2:28 PM

Originally Posted by goodolarchie

No matter how many times I read this I can't help but feel like this is a bad change for guilds that run 2 trees. If my understanding of the jump mechanic is correct, the priority flowchart goes as
[Player without your Rejuv]
vv
[player without any rejuv] <~ removed
vv
[player with health deficit]
vv
[player at full health]

So assume a raid where only 2 players have a health deficit, rogue at -7k, hunter at -6k. Tree #2 has a rejuv on the rogue.
They've essentially removed #2 from the code so yours will jump to the rogue instead of the hunter, and that's bad because both rejuvs are now more likely to be overhealing, and the hunter is more likely to die. Rejuv is very powerful now, especially hasted, and I find it rare that overlapping rejuvs is better than preferring an un-rejuv'd target with health deficit. If these assumptions are correct (and I don't have a 4pc to test, I use 4t9), then your effective 4t10 healing will go down, because you'll see more overlapping instead of blanket coverage.

Also worth mentioning that Blizzard made changes to 2 LK weapons that make them much more viable for us:

[Royal Scepter of Terenas II] = haste instead of mp5
[Archus, Greatstaff of Antonidas]: = haste instead of crit

(and the non-heroic counterparts)

They didn't specify how it will work now; it's just as likely they added something to still make it prioritize people without a rejuv over those with another druid's rejuv. Testing will need to be done to see how it actually works now.

Overall, though, even IF it works as you fear I still don't see it as being much of an issue. The likelihood of someone without a rejuv having more health than someone with is pretty low, and if their health IS lower perhaps the two rejuvs aren't a bad idea.

This also means that the set bonus becomes useful on any aura fight where a 5x1 rotation is preferred and where it's highly likely that no member of the raid will be without a rejuv (assuming at least 2 Druids). Prior to the change the set bonus was all but useless on fights like BQL.

snipe2kill · 02/08/10, 7:25 PM

Looks like tonight I'll be weighing up
Archus vs.
Royal Sceptre + Sundial vs.
Trauma + Sundial.

I'm awfully new to this, just wondering if anyone can tell me if I'm heading in the right direction with my calculations.

My sheet caters for my bad gear by making the assumption that spellpower is my primary stat as long as a haste rating of 856 is maintained. It also assume that due my gear (or lack thereof) all slots are gemmed with pure haste, so for every point of haste I gain off a new piece of gear, I get to regem 1.15pt of spellpower. I'm then boiling spirit down into Mp5 and sp, and judging the worth of an upgrade by mostly wether it is an increase or decrease in spellpower, but also changes in stam, int, mp5 and crit.

Am I missing anything or will this procedure suffice for my basic item comparisons?

Kaloryth · 02/08/10, 11:09 PM

You say the spreadsheet assumes you gem pure haste. Technically if you're trying to get the most bang for your buck, you should be gemming sp/haste as you gain 1 sp gemming 2 reckless ametrines instead of gemming red/yellow.

Crit has almost no benefit once you pick up t10. Make sure that is weighted very low.

snipe2kill · 02/08/10, 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by Kaloryth

You say the spreadsheet assumes you gem pure haste. Technically if you're trying to get the most bang for your buck, you should be gemming sp/haste as you gain 1 sp gemming 2 reckless ametrines instead of gemming red/yellow.

Crit has almost no benefit once you pick up t10. Make sure that is weighted very low.

thanks for your input, gemming orange is an interesting point I missed. And yes, I am basically ignorning crit entirely. Weighting sp > mana > mp5 > crit.

Just one other thing, are socket bonuses that require blues worth gemming? Or is pure sp always the best way?

Feya · 02/09/10, 12:44 AM

I wanted to drop in some updated numbers I just got done putting out. On our Sindragosa-25man kill (first for us!) [Trauma] put out some HUGE numbers for me. I realize that earlier in the week the hot-fix had not applied, and the strategy we use for this fight is highly conducive to generating big numbers with this weapon. We typically have the raid stacked on top of each other almost the entire fight. Either way, check these out;

Skada: Firepatch's Healing for Sindragosa, 22:48:05 - 22:58:04:
1. Rejuvenation 2476157 (57.6%)
2. Wild Growth 1285967 (29.9%)
3. Fountain of Light 405591 (9.4%)
4. Swiftmend 74567 (1.7%)
5. Regrowth 56022 (1.3%)

For the first time ever, Ive seen Fountain of Light reach above the 4% healing done mark for an encounter. 10% of healing done seems grossly overpowered considering other items out there [Althor's Abacus] for example. This can't possible be the level they leave it at. If it does remain at this level it easily makes up for the loss of stats and becomes an easy BIS for us. No other item could possibly be worth losing 10% (in peak conditions, granted) healing throughput except for maybe Valnyr.

Anyone else seeing these numbers?

ttyl · 02/09/10, 1:11 AM

1 Druid's Fountain of Light averaged 6.5% (of his total healing) on our LK attempts. I was pretty amazed by that, considering the damage is inconsistent/sometimes nonexistent.

Originally Posted by snipe2kill

are socket bonuses that require blues worth gemming?

After 1 for meta: +9 sp is a no-brainer, +7 sp is ~2 sp vs ~4 mp5, +5 sp is ~4 sp vs ~4 mp5. Most prefer to gem for max throughput and make larger/ temporary trade-offs (idol, trinket, innervate, etc).

Phlo · 02/09/10, 2:55 AM

Some more numbers about Trauma:
World of Logs - Real Time Raid Analysis
[please click on "healing by spell"]

I only took this weapon for fun, almost like i took Abracadaver, but oh so shocking numbers!
Roughly 8% overall on every heavy raid healing encounters.
I'm sure many things have already been said in these forums about Fountain of Light in general, but the recent changes and discussions made me think it might be worth a post linking to a fresh world of logs.

Nefaruis · 02/09/10, 9:29 AM

These last few Trauma reports are focused on Sindragosa. I realize that's b/c the fix occured after most of us had cleared the rest of this instance. However, This fight seems light it sticks out as a particularly good fight for it due to the nature of Unchained Magic. My question is beyond the Sindragosa encounter can we count on the trauma proc to be substantive healing?

A ~200 heal just seems like it is chipping away at something a rejuv would heal anyways on the next tick. It can show up as any amount of healing and I still question its true worth towards actual Lifesaving Healing Done. I'm not knocking the fact that over a fight its accounting for upwards of 300k healing done now, it just doesn't feel like its doing much beyond meter padding.

Arentios · 02/09/10, 9:55 AM

Originally Posted by Nefaruis

These last few Trauma reports are focused on Sindragosa. I realize that's b/c the fix occured after most of us had cleared the rest of this instance. However, This fight seems light it sticks out as a particularly good fight for it due to the nature of Unchained Magic. My question is beyond the Sindragosa encounter can we count on the trauma proc to be substantive healing?

A ~200 heal just seems like it is chipping away at something a rejuv would heal anyways on the next tick. It can show up as any amount of healing and I still question its true worth towards actual Lifesaving Healing Done. I'm not knocking the fact that over a fight its accounting for upwards of 300k healing done now, it just doesn't feel like its doing much beyond meter padding.

'Rejuv would heal anyways on the next tick' and 'Lifesaving Healing Done' are somewhat mutually exclusive. If Rejuvenation alone is keeping people topped off, then yes, the proc is fairly useless, but most gearing choices are pretty moot at that point anyway. It's better to discount the encounters where Trauma is just more overhealing than to discount the encounters where it's adding effective healing, since those are the times where raid damage in has the potential to be higher than raid healing out and thus itemization choices can really matter.

avanlee · 02/09/10, 11:29 AM

Trauma was 6.8% of my EH on LK attempts last night. Not as nice as the druid that had his legendary mace proc do 17.6% of his EH, but still.