This [shields partially wasted] is only true on non-tanks. For a tank during the fight ~0% of PW:S is wasted (tanks don't avoid all dmg for 30seconds) and for DA it is <15% (DA's are relatively small by comparison to PW:S ~50% or less, 8 seconds is still a long time in the tank world of dmg income). The overwriting for DA is a definite issue on live but not on ptr, and for tanks it will be <15% waste on ptr because a new DA refreshes the 8sec timer. At the crit of Disc the chance is very high that you will get at least 1 crit in the 8seconds to refresh a DA that would fade, though whether it would last that long in the first place is a big question.
Granted. But in a lot of cases, we do shield other people than tanks, and use POM / flash on the raid.
This might be off the topic a bit... but I tried out Disc spec last night after being Holy Healer and my HPS numbers are not too overwhelming to me. My intell and crit were stacked have all right gems and enchants but I must of been doing something wrong on my rotation. Boss fights my HPS was up there but during trash... ummm /yawn** that is where my numbers were low. I guess I am use to COH - Raid Healing.
But if there is anyone that could help me out I would really appreciate it... we are attempting Sarth +3drakes this weekend and I would really like to try this out.
This might be off the topic a bit... but I tried out Disc spec last night after being Holy Healer and my HPS numbers are not too overwhelming to me. My intell and crit were stacked have all right gems and enchants but I must of been doing something wrong on my rotation. Boss fights my HPS was up there but during trash... ummm /yawn** that is where my numbers were low. I guess I am use to COH - Raid Healing.
But if there is anyone that could help me out I would really appreciate it... we are attempting Sarth +3drakes this weekend and I would really like to try this out.
Thanks!
Discipline does most of its healing through mitigation, not effective healing, and is a weak raid healer. So this is normal.
Any way to figure out Divine Aegis? I can look at the total healing from crits, and figure out the total shield that was applied. No real way to figure out how much was actually used, though, right? Anyone have a decent number that you multiply that by, say 30%? Or is it higher/lower?
There was considerable discussion of this topic on the healing 3.0 compendium thread, but here are a few useful bottom lines for you:
At least while in combat, the vast majority of DA shields are consumed -- typically 85-90%
DA absorbed damage varies but is generally ~10-20% of effective healing done if you need a rough estimate
However, if you're taking pw: shield as being 5 times the non-crit glyph heal, then you really should compute DA shields directly from the size of the crit heals. You can't really compare the numbers well otherwise since it becomes an "apples and oranges" comparison.
Many people seem to think that the unabsorbed portion of a shield is like overhealing, but it is really not at all like that. Unabsorbed/unused shield is really more like "effective" healing done on a target that isn't subsequently damaged. Consider the following problematic but typical scenario:
1. X gets hit for 8K damage.
2. Healer A shields the target with a 5K shield.
3. Healer B heals the target for 5K healing.
4. No subsequent damage takes place on X.
Let's suppose you're trying to properly credit healing, including absorbed damage. There's no completely obvious way to handle the above case, but I would suggest that saying healer B should get credit for a 5K heal with 0% overheal while healer A should get no credit for anything or credit for a 100% "overhealing" shield is grossly unfair and misrepresents what actually happened.
I would be tempted to say that neither the shield nor the heal was really "effective" since it turned out that it wasn't really needed. However, there is an entrenched tradition in calling that 5K heal "effective healing". One could argue that the heal has the advantage of not expiring, and that is true. However, the shield has some advanages in preventing pushback, adding to the targets health, and not interfering with heals (such as the one from healer B, which would have partially overhealed 40% if not for that). Overall, I can't escape thinking that the shield and the heal should be seen as roughly equal in value.
Importantly, this means that total effective healing is statistically more comparable to total shield size, not absorbed damage as everyone assumes. Actually absorbed damage is something else -- think of it as "super effective healing". A little reflection will convince you that absorbed damage is a very high quality statistic, much better than "effective" healing because a significant portion of effective (or shall we say "non-overhealing") healing just isn't all that effective. It is not always "used" in the sense that absorbed damage is.
The problem is that effective healing does not distinguish between healing on a target taking ongoing damage and healing on one who never gets hit again. That makes "effective healing" a sloppier and less useful statistic and more analogous to total shield size, because you only know that it could be absorbed by a subsequent hit, not that it actually was absorbed.
Originally Posted by Alv!ra
When I compare my modified recount to wws or a recount report from another player, my healing output is roughly 30-40% higher on my recount, with pw:shield being 70-80% of the difference, and DA the rest. Depending on how much shield-tossing and raid crosshealing I've been doing, I'll estimate the real effective heal output difference to be closer to +20%, though. But again, there's no way of knowing for sure.
See the above and the other thread for more, but the quick and dirty method some people use is to add 1/3 to the recount numbers. That value was partly derived from some very thorough parses of combat logs where I did figure out actual absorbed damage. Results varied pretty widely from encounter to encounter, however. Some are more "shield-intensive" than others.
+20% is probably being too modest, especially if you're trying to convert to something like effective healing.
Originally Posted by wowmeteronline
4.Shield would be always effheal and no overheal at all and equals the number it absorbed.It's the limitation of combatlog.sorry about that!
any more question please let me know!sorry about my engRish!
Originally Posted by TheDoctor
Unless there is some modification to the combat log it may be valuable to track things differently....
- Track mitigation of PW:S/DA applied as an approximate value.
- Have an absorption line item for the effective amount of absorbed dmg, calculate its sum effectiveness based on absorbed/(DA+PW:S).
Ideally, I'd like a stats meter to track:
- Total applied PW:Shield and DA shield size
- Actually absorbed damage (or average % of shield absorbed would suffice too)
This would acknowledge that shielding and healing are not quite the same thing. An intelligent reviewer of the data would need to know both those statistics, I believe, to make reasonable sense of the data.
Both DA and CoH are 41-point talents. So it's impossible to have both. However, it can be a bug like the one we had with SoL proccing on priests w/o the talent.
The priest named Fallsback could cast DA and CoH at the same time......what kind of spec of her?
is it a bug in combatlog?anyone could kind answer my question?
My experience says that Aegis is applied ~1 second AFTER the critical heal, not the other way around, so you are excluding important information.
Three possibilities
1) Messed up talent tree providing more points than one should have gotten
2) Combatlog is buggy
3) There's another priest in the raid that has "loaned" the holy priest the talent. I remember getting Surge of Light from Holy Priests, probably due to prayer of mending bouncing on me in one version of the PTR.
Hm, last week, when i (disc priest) died on taddius due to massive lag, i was watching the fight, and noticed DA bubbles on people, that just couldn't be mine, since i was dead for quite a while. All other priests in raid were holy. So, i guess its the same thing as i was getting Surge of light procs as disc some time ago.
Many people seem to think that the unabsorbed portion of a shield is like overhealing, but it is really not at all like that. Unabsorbed/unused shield is really more like "effective" healing done on a target that isn't subsequently damaged. Consider the following problematic but typical scenario:
1. X gets hit for 8K damage.
2. Healer A shields the target with a 5K shield.
3. Healer B heals the target for 5K healing.
4. No subsequent damage takes place on X.
Let's suppose you're trying to properly credit healing, including absorbed damage. There's no completely obvious way to handle the above case, but I would suggest that saying healer B should get credit for a 5K heal with 0% overheal while healer A should get no credit for anything or credit for a 100% "overhealing" shield is grossly unfair and misrepresents what actually happened.
I would be tempted to say that neither the shield nor the heal was really "effective" since it turned out that it wasn't really needed. However, there is an entrenched tradition in calling that 5K heal "effective healing". One could argue that the heal has the advantage of not expiring, and that is true. However, the shield has some advantages in preventing pushback, adding to the targets health, and not interfering with heals (such as the one from healer B, which would have partially overhealed 40% if not for that). Overall, I can't escape thinking that the shield and the heal should be seen as roughly equal in value.
I agree that unabsorbed shield has more value than overheal, as it could have been of more use.
But I also don't agree that unabsorbed shields are equivalent to effective healing.
Effective healing is roughly equivalent to absorbed shields, that's life "added to the target", with a slight advantage to absorbed shields (they prevent damage instead of reacting to it, hence lowering the death risk). In other words, absorbed shields are like pre-healing (with 100% efficiency) the target that will get damaged. In that way, it is clearly superior.
But the "temporary" component of shields is really not meaningless. In lots of fights, you can have some low frequency high burst damage on the raid (think to the first boss of Hyjal as a good example, or Kel THusad). Shielding whilst the damage is clearly a good option. But when the high part of damage is over, you want to heal the target back to full HP, in case of it gets hit again later. But you don't want to shield it, since it is likely that it won't take any damage in 30s. For Kel Thusad, you need to top off raid members after the frost bolt volley, such that you have more time to react to an eventual frost blast. But you don't shield preemptively for frost blast.
Hi.. a simple question really.
I noticed the Darkmoon Card: greatness is placed under trinkets which are good. My question is. With ulduar around the cornor would it be wise to still go for the trinket. If yes. Which version the one that gives +90spirit or +90int. Fx. something like Pandora's Plea (108int and chance on equip to increase SP by 850 for 10sec) seems like a good substitue? I ask hence the upcoming nerf of mana regen.
Also another thing. How much does disc value haste and I've read in the healing compendium made of constantinus that holy priests should try to get around 25% crit raid buffed. How much should Disc priest aim for raid buffed? The questioned above is regarding to 3.1 coming up - some things will change I would imagine?
Last edited by Arrox : 03/26/09 at 4:47 PM.
E Pluribus Unmn!
You can cut my wings away, but i will never forget how it was to fly!
I agree that unabsorbed shield has more value than overheal, as it could have been of more use.
But I also don't agree that unabsorbed shields are equivalent to effective healing.
Effective healing is roughly equivalent to absorbed shields, that's life "added to the target", with a slight advantage to absorbed shields (they prevent damage instead of reacting to it, hence lowering the death risk). In other words, absorbed shields are like pre-healing (with 100% efficiency) the target that will get damaged. In that way, it is clearly superior.
But the "temporary" component of shields is really not meaningless...
Basically my point is:
1. Casting a shield fills up a shield to absorb a certain amount of damage.
2. Casting a heal fills up a health bar to absorb a certain amount of damage.
3. Therefore, casting a shield of a certain size is analogous to casting a heal of the same size: both can potentially absorb the same amount of damage.
Absorbed damage is better because it actually was used to absorb damage. That makes it better than effective healing. Just as not all shields get completely used, not all effective healing actually gets completely "used" either, at least not in the short term where it matters most [more on heals that get used in the long term further down].
I don't believe pouring health into a partially empty health bar has value by itself. Instead, the value of health is proportional to its ability to prevent the target from dying by absorbing damage. So health added to a target which is about to take damage is more valuable than health added to a target which is not about to take damage. I just do not believe a point healed on someone who takes a hit a second later and a point healed on someone who doesn't take a hit for a minute are equal in value.
Having said that, I do agree that the temporary nature of shields is really not meaningless. If they did not expire, shields would be better than in every way. Technically, healing can "expire" when maximum health changes, but for practical purposes heals do not expire. So, if you want to consider damage that may happen more than 30 seconds down the road, then a heal becomes superior to a shield in that context.
However, my contention is:
1. The vast majority of heals or shields will be on targets that will take damage in the fairly immediate future, most within a few seconds. There is very good data on this for shields, showing that they infrequently expire.
2. Shields have mild advantages over heals for all of those cases.
3. In my estimation, the value of those few heals which actually are useful after 30 seconds is counterbalanced by the advantages of shield in all those other cases.
Also, I maybe was not very clear in my last post: I agree unabsorbed shields are not equivalent to effective healing. What I was trying to say was that unabsorbed shields were really more analogous to heals where the target never gets hit again (which is a portion of your effective healing but not all of it). For statistical comparison purposes, effective healing is most analogous to total (absorbed + unabsorbed) shielding done. Put another way:
Unabsorbed shield (could have been used, but was not) =<
Effective healing (could possibly be used or not) =<
Absorbed damage (Could have been used, and was)
Total shieding (absorbed + unabsorbed) has value between unabsorbed and absorbed damage, similar to effective healing. In many scenarios (e.g. healing ongoing damage on a tank) effective healing may be close in value to absorbed damage, but in those same cases total shielding will also be close in value to absorbed damage.
Hopefully that makes more sense.
Last edited by Promethia : 03/27/09 at 11:06 AM.
Reason: added clarifications
Don't forget how much better absorbs play with HoTs compared to direct healing. As a disc priest you have insane synergy with a druid which clearly shows in tighter content like 10-mans. A druid's biggest weakness is spike damage, a discipline priest's greatest strength is mitigating spike damage. Imagine a squishy on 50% with HoTs running on him, how many times have you seen those HoTs go to waste with 2-3 people shooting fast heals on the squishy in rapid succession? Out of the fast heals a discipline priest's shield is by far the best HPM talented. It's a potentially insane gain in HPM for your healing squad.
It's a whole new dimension to the argument, but a very valid one I believe.
i agree
IMO a disc priest is ALL about damage mitigation between PW:S and Aegis any crit stacked disc priest should have no problems keeping up a MT, given the effects of single target healing, between the shields and sniping off penance or flash,
given the new tall of BW:S when and if it arives we can then start helping raid heals, as MITIAGTING damage on the raid,
One point in healing focus is crucial, since it stacks with Imp Conc. Aura and makes you uninterruptable (good for penance and long casts like PoH), 15% less mana cost on Gheal and Penance is very good to have if you don't have top notch gear. You're sacrificing 3% crit, but that's something you might want to change when you start to over gear the content again. 50% chance to apply Grace can arguably be better than 100% if you switch targets once in a while from the tank and you don't want Grace to fall off... on the other hand with 100% chance of applying grace you'll have it on the tank in one Penance. Either way it's not a big deal, and if you think it is you're probably trading it for 5% off mana cost @ Penance and Gheal.
focusing on crit since im crit stacked, and mana regen
hym of hope glyph for shorter channeling time ( depending on how much of a nerf to the spirit mana regen)
pain supp glyph for casting while stunned
and glyph of penance since its one of main spells i use since crits alot and with agies stacking should be a lil op till they nerf it ;-)
Zarya, the Glyph you are talking about was implemented but it did not work out the way Blizzard planned, and they have replaced - of fixed - it so that it channels 2 seconds longer so you get an extra tick. In essence, craptastic.
Given the current PTR build, I am hesitating between the following two specs for deep discipline, could anyone state what spec they'd choose and why ?
Between those two, definitely the 57/14 build IMO. For basically two reasons:
1. You are unlikely to have a great reason to cast greater heal often, and penance is so cheap that 15% off of it doesn't save you much, even though you cast penance more frequently.
2. This may depend on details of the new content as well as what other healers you have in raid, but renew is unlikely to be a big source of healing for you, so boosting it is fairly low yield.
Weighed against the many benefits of higher tier talents off the discipline tree, it seem like a pretty easy call to forego a 51/20 build.
A question, how much crit rating, spirit and haste does people have raid buffed?
In the future try to post these questions in the simple Q/A thread. Most people will go for 90 intellect since it gives so much more regen both passively and actively. Before the spirit nerfs out of combat, some people wanted to go with 90 intellect with 300 spirit proc since the passive intellect was worth so much more, but with some clever playing you could OO5SR with 300 spirit and gain a hefty chunk of mana.
I didn't read your talent spec, but for Holy PoH is a much better glyph than shield.
Since Disc really doesnt have much shot at being raid healing (thoughts of absurdly hasted PoH, with glyph and criting pass quickly from head). The 57/14 spec is probably the most viable. You want crit and a lot of it. More importantly getting a 1 sec faster mass dispel is not the main boon of that talent, but rather the 4% more healing. I understand trying to get cheaper gheals; however, you only ever cast gheals as disc if you really really need to heal the tank. AFAIK they haven't changed the fact that you can PW:S Penance and then gheal and still have BT affect your gheal. That is just a ton of healing in a very short time.
Also it seems the BoS will be pally only (last i heard) so the 3% mitigation raid wide will only be available through disc priests (except for the person that gets the vigilance).
03/25/09, 11:07 AM
Similar Threads
