Even with this change, it is still worth stacking the two on the day phase of the heroic Tsulong encounter, inspite of the nerf to their synergy.

My argument, though, would be some very suspect maths - healing tide will not provide more than 40% increased single target healing over 10 seconds.

Assuming HS spam with EM + Troll racial = ~1 second cast time at 3764 breakpoint.

113.5%*0.4 = 45% SP per second - not including increased crit chance on first 2/3 casts due to tidal waves. Not including Unleash Life healing on first Healing Surge.
16%*0.4 = 6.4% SP per tick Rip Tide healing - 7 ticks over 18 seconds in my gear -
0.38*6.4 = 2.4% SP per second
Healing Rain - 19.7*0.4= 7.88% SP per tick - 6 ticks in my gear in 10 seconds - 0.6*7.88 = 4.728% SP per second
HST - 44.5*0.4 = 17.8% SP per tick - 9 ticks in 15 seconds - 0.6*17.8% = 10.68% SP per second

HTT - 48% SP per tick - (normally) one tick per second under EM and troll racial.

As you can see, this is fairly pathetic maths. I haven't counted in the effects of increased haste from EM and Troll racial on HST, for instance, nor earthliving, nor other factors such as AA. However, it's clear to see that (if this is actually a vaugely relevant number) that AG, in my "maths" at least scores higher.

A spreadsheet for new 5.2 trinkets. Upon downloading and opening the file the values for Haste and Spellpower can be changed. This will alter accordingly ICDs and Healing for procs.

With the buff to Conductivity in 5.2 (20%->30%, target can be anywhere), it seems to me this talent may deserve some re-evaluation from its current ('not HTT') status.

(Caveat: I heal 10s. This probably matters a lot in this context as I already use single-target heals a lot.)

I threw together some numbers on HTT vs. Conductivity HPS:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...Xc&usp=sharing

Of course, feel free to point out any errors. The HTT HPS should be fairly obvious. To obtain the Conductivity HPS, I used the following methodology:

1. Assume HR is cast exactly on CD, so subtract (HR cast time * 18) from 3 minutes.
2. Calculate the total cast time for a TW cycle (RT + <x> + <x>) for each of the three single-target heals.
3. Using the cycle time, figure out how many cycles could be completed in 3 minutes minus HR casting time.
4. Use the number of cycles to calculate the number of casts for each of the three heals, thus total healing done (and HPS).

Of course, there is a lot of fudging there. This assumes HR is able to be cast exactly on CD with all remaining available time spent on single-target heals or RT, which is not realistic. It also assumes chain-casting and no use of ES and CH, which is again not realistic.

That being said, the results can still be valuable as a point of comparison. For instance, for the example data in the spreadsheet (28000 SP, 15% crit, 16% haste, 42% mastery, raid at 80% health), assuming I made no errors, the HPS values are as follows:

• Conductivity - HS: 10214.9
• Conductivity - HW: 5068.9
• Conductivity - GHW: 9229.1
• HTT: 4608.9

So, for GHW, for instance, as long as you filled about half of the 3 minutes with HR + GHW (w/ TW), the healing provided by the two talents would be approximately the same.

Of course, HTT is still very strong in a lot of circumstances. Any fight featuring high spikes of raid damage - predictable or unpredictable - is going to be better healed with HTT. That being said, I think based on the numbers Conductivity could become a superior choice on fights with reasonably steady raid-wide damage (in this tier, H Garalon comes to mind).

There were some errors on your spreadsheet, mainly with calculating the actual healing done by each spell and its crit value. The idea of the post is really interesting however. For all my calculations below I will use all the theory suggested by Audiate about optimizing Conductivity to the max. In this updated spreadsheet I have left Audiate's tables on top and I have added mine on the bottom. With updated numbers that reflect my character to date, Audiate would get the following results :

• Conductivity - HS: 12.153
• Conductivity - HW: 6096
• Conductivity - GHW: 11099
• HTT: 5518

However the correct results are the following :

• Conductivity - HS: 16410
• Conductivity - HW: 6982
• Conductivity - GHW: 12600
• HTT: 9770

The difference in results is what makes the new talents changes marginally interesting or not. With Audiate's results one would argue that with any given spell used, conductivity's optimal throughput is superior to HTT. However that is not the case. We can see that when using HW Conductivity's throughput plummets. Restoration shamans are infamous for their poor regen. Since Conductivity does not work with CH and HW results in low throughput, then we have to rely on GHW and HS as choice spells. While GHW throughput is better than HTT ( when used optimally to the max as proposed and originally calculated ) HS is far superior. So much so that if used in a constant RT-HS-HS rotation it almost doubles HTT throughput. The problem with using Conductivity as such lies within our regen restrictions. In order to achieve 16410 HPS we will need to constantly use HS which would most definitely leave our mana bar empty. As such we will need to weave in GHW which will help in maintaining high enough throughput. However this is not very realistic either leaving us with the option of integrating HW into our rotation which will keep us mana neutral but will lower our throughput significantly. It is worth noting that with the changes happening in our EM ( now on 1.5min CD) we can always ensure that every Ascendance will be boosted enough to generate significantly higher numbers while utilizing it within Conductivity's parameters. Regen issues aside , it is impossible to guarantee even a continuous RT- HW/GHW/HS due to restoration shamans many upkeep processes. HR casting itself, UE every second HR, HST on CD, MTT, various talents we might also be using as Primal Elementalist, SBT, calling back totems by Totemic recall, these just to name a few, while keeping up with movement fights and avoiding boss abilities.

I can possibly see a niche for this talent in 10man, where the raid is stacked, there is very minimal movement and major healing cooldowns are not called for or the other 2 healers ( frankly in a 2 healing fight it will be even more difficult ) can cover the incoming damage while we have enough mana to use Ascendance. Even so however I cannot yet be sure that using Conductivity will result in better overall throughput. The bonus of using Conductivity I believe is stabilizing the raid from slow ticking constant damage and if there is such a fight and HTT is not desperately needed then we could possibly use Conductivity. Personally I think the buff in this talent is not yet enough to make it viable. If Conductivity would synergize with CH then we could finally consider it a contender.

Some thoughts after reviewing the logs before they were locked.
With current RPPM calculations this trinket has a chance to proc every 50sec. Theoretically always. For a 9:25sec fight we would have 565sec/50= 11.3 times which is on par with the logs. However to my knowledge all RPPM trinkets have a 10sec prohibitive period, which means that the procs should never be able to stack. If it does, it will result to a relatively small loss of MP5.

This info is very interesting, when we get more logs we will be able to evaluate this matter further.

Horridon's has no ICD (RPPM trinkets usually don't), but I didn't know it could stack. That makes the math messier--I can post more about that, but since 1 RPPM won't lead to too much stacking you can ignore it and get pretty close (stacking makes it really complicated).

Grab the formula I posted here to do the basic RPPM calc: Theorycraft 101: How to Compute Uptime of a Proc-based Buff | It's Dangerous to Go Alone

I have already calculated procs and values using your math it was most useful. I documented my findings at 5.2 Healing Trinket Compendium, and posted an abbreviated version in this guide in the Trinkets section. The fact that the procs can stack from logs so far show very little loss to MP5, but it does make it a little more unpredictable due to the fact that you may get 3 procs within 15seconds and then wait for another proc that may come after quite a while.

For critical heals, you are using 268% crits, so you are including both AA and the meta. For the latter, I should have stated that I intentionally omitted it with the assumption that we would be using the legendary meta this tier. (However, I don't think it's significant either way as it will affect both HTT and Conductivity equally.) For the former, AA I don't believe should be included in any of these calculations:

• For HTT, don't criticals *not* apply AA?
• For the single-target heals, AA is not included when calculating the amount which Conductivity calculates the 30% value using. This I verified by testing. It is just the amount of the critical heal itself.

This is unrelated, but I neglected to say it in my first post: it is not explicitly pointed out in the information on Conductivity (although it can be assumed from the tooltip), but Conductivity heals themselves cannot crit and are unaffected by mastery.

I am still looking over the healing numbers.

The average was as predicted around 50sec per proc. However the problem is that when the buff refreshes your stacks refresh also meaning one proc would give you 2 stacks before it was refreshed for a new one that would give you the full 5 stacks before expiring. I am not sure if I am figuring this out wrong, however it seems to me that either the nerf or the buff of MP5 this trinket sees after this new info is not substantial enough especially factoring in the nature of RPPM procs.

HTT criticals do not apply AA so I think we are safe to leave this column as is. I wasn't aware Conductivity didn't include the AA number into the resulted heal, this changes up things a little bit although not so much. The irregularities you had were mostly founded at your base heal and direct heal with no crit which made some of the difference later. I am always assuming the existence of the meta gem in all my calculations however we could also make another column for the new meta gem.

I will be making my own logs and will try sharing them here. It is indeed interesting. I asked also another community what they have seen and got one reply pertaining towards the stacks. He said that he got 3 stacks as well at one time.

Another thing thats interesting is this link that was shared Cloudburst - Spell - World of Warcraft

It seems that it has a number 5 in the pic which can mean a max stack of 5?