Now that Je'Tze's Bell is BoE it is possible to buy, but I'm wondering how what the two best current trinkets are. With relation to Chain Heal spamming I'd believe that the best two trinkets are [Je'Tze's Bell] and [Spark of Life]. However, I am a JC and the [Figurine - Sapphire Owl] with two of the 27 Intellect JC gems makes for perfect regen: considering how valued Intellect, as a stat, is.

I believe though if we want to be 'pure CH spamming' in a raid you will need to use mostly 25 raiding man gear, which has a lot of haste, compared with the 10 man raiding gear which has a lot a crit. Possibly though, due to Replenishment, it would be in our best interests to gear Elemental-wise. Taking both critical strike rating and haste rating and gemming for pure Intellect. I'm not sure how this would do, but in our raids we generally consist of 2-3 Resto Shaman, 1 Priest, 1-2 Pallies and 1-2 Druids and most often than not we stack 2 Resto Shaman in a group with 3 other Healers for double Mana Spring (obviously, on fights like where a dispell is needed we manage 1 Shaman per group).

Durnitol's post about different gear sets is amazing. I think his post is a step towards benefiting us with the best gear possible. I am, however, saddened that for another expansion we're focusing more on gaining the best for HPS, HEP and HPM(H.P.Mana) instead of focusing on rotations for the best HPS, HEP and HPM... I've always beleve healing is an art form and the science should be left to the DPS.

Also, with the addition of a new respecc is the new Healing Way any good at all? Mostly I cast it 2-3 times a fight... I spam LHW most of the time, actually, instead of CH. Sartharion with Drakes is a perfect example of how LHW can be used effectively for longetivity and HPS (when combined with the haste gains from Riptide procing TW). Ancestral Awakening, in such conditions, shows to be a good investment of points. Moreso, probably, than HW could ever be.

For chain heal spam [Soul Preserver] is more regen and similar hps to Spark. I wouldn't say spark is second best.

HPM for each spell, from Daidalos's spreadsheet
9.03 Lesser Healing Wave
9.32 Chain Heal (1 target)
12.05 Healing Wave
12.39 LHW (w Earth Shield)
12.74 Riptide
13.98 Chain Heal (2 target)
14.22 Healing Wave (w Healing Way)
16.31 Chain Heal (3 target)
17.48 Chain Heal (4 target)
- Includes average AA procs.


I'm questioning the need for the LHW glyph since the nerf. It is slightly better than HW, It is less efficient than CH-2t, HW+HW and Riptide. The only time when LHW+glyph is useful is when I need a steady stream of quick heals on the tank. I'm not finding that happening very often. HW will overheal more, but overheal is not an issue if mana isn't running out, which it isn't for me.

That said, if mana is not an issue, why am I using Glyph of Water Shield (I meant so say [Glyph of Water Mastery]) ? 30mp5 = 1800 mana in a 5 minute fight. As my gear improves, and my stats go up, this glyph becomes less and less important.

I think you mean [Item not found!] not [Glyph of Water Shield] The other choices for major glyphs could be ELW or healing stream but neither of those is going to significantly increase effective hps in most fights. If mana truly isn't an issue though go with something you find useful. I'd still argue LHW glyph is too useful to drop for now.


Edit: Removed incorrect statement about WS glyph.

The only problem with this is that when you swap out the figurine on a fight where mana isn't an issue, you lose the 2 JC gems as well.

I completely agree with your second paragraph. Ghostcrawler has previously commented that the developers are OK with certain talents and abilities being important for entry-level raiding but slowly being phased out as better gear opens up different choices. For resto shaman, most of us are already at the point where the 30 mp5 of GoWM is a drop in the bucket compared to the ~60 mp1 of replenishment or the combined mana returns of other secondary sources. Similarly, the +45 healing of 3/3 Elemental Weapons is only a 1.8% increase in +healing even at a relatively modest 2500 raid buffed spellpower. These numbers will only look worse when we start working our way through Ulduar.

An entry-level resto shaman would probably get good use out of 3/3 EW and GoWM, but at this point in the Naxx/3.0 content cycle, I've replaced them with 3/3 Healing Way and Glyph of Healing Wave.

I wonder why I hear everybody talking about the JC trinket, while there is a trinket out there that doesn't require a profession and does the same (possibly even better) [Darkmoon Card: Greatness]. I have been using this trinket for a while now (when I feel I need the extra mana regen ofcourse) and it's absolutely amazing. Using Mana Tide during the proc nets you around another 1000 mana, and the overall gains from the insane amounts of intellect on this is great.

Is there any specific reason this trinket never got mentioned (besides the cost, which shouldn't matter for most people who are serious about raiding) or am I just missing out on something?

edit again: I'm an idiot.

I think you should check that text again. I don't know of any resto shaman that would have more str, agi, or spi than Int. Making it always proc Int. Please take your own advice.

you said yourself that you use it when you feel the need for extra mana regen, which is the main reason to use the trinket. The extra healing and crit is not really worth it.
Not many, if any, encounters require extra mana regen at this time, which makes the trinket sporadically useful.

I know it's usefullness, that was not my question. I was just wondering why alot of u state that the JC trinket is ''second best'' or a ''at least top 3'' of the trinkets, while the Greatness deck never gets mentioned, while it's just as good (if not better)

The [Darkmoon Card: Greatness] proc is incredibly useful mid-fight. 300 Int is (from the wiki):
.33 * 300 = 99 crit rating
.18 * 300 = 54 spellpower
.225 * 300 = 67.5 mp5 (replenish)

You get even more if you time your Mana Tide appropriately. It is certainly a mistake to think the proc only affects maximum mana.

1 INT = .6mp5 thanks to BoKings and Ancestral Knowledge, not .225.

.6 * 300 = 180 MP5

Replenish alone gives you .225 mp5. You don't get the .3 mp5 from 18 mana since it's a proc, and I did not include the .072 mp5 from Mana Tide since it's not that simple.

For Mana Tide, each pulse that is during a Greatness Int proc gives you an extra 18*300*.06=324 mana. If you get all 12 seconds of the totem inside a Greatness proc, you'd get 1296 extra mana. If you knew this would happen on a 5-minute fight, that's 21.6 mp5 (0.072 mp5 per Int). If you wanted to put a value on the mana internal to the proc (assuming a 30% uptime), you'd get 21.6 mp5/.3 = 72 mp5. That lets you plug it into a simulator that then re-divides the benefit by it's uptime, and correctly gives you the net effect to the length of the fight.

I agre on the quality of the post in general. Obviously for different circumstances to have various sets of gear cannot hurt. BUT: currently (and lets hope Ulduar will change that), I do not have any problems with mana at all, neither in Naxx10 or naxx 25, to take these as examples. I equipp the gear set with Spellpower, haste ad crit. Pretty much in that priority order. When there is mp/5 on that item as well, thats nice but I dont care about it.
Replenishment is of course a requirement for that gear selection( tho I think basically every raid got that anyway), but beside that I have in a naxx10 normally Bok and not Bow and we only got 1 Mana SPring, while I dont even use Mana Tide every fight. Replenishment, Water Shield, Mana Spring, commonly used Insightful Earthsiege Diamond, Mana Tide and if needed a Mana Potion solve any mana issues(except your THE mana detonation target of KT
Therefore I simply do not see the point pre Ulduar of Mana regen trinkets or a high value of Mp/5 for your raiding gear collection. Things can be different at the start of 80/raiding start, but further into raiding progress and completion it simply shouldnt be an issue anymore.
Sadly it is as the quoted is saying: rotations and smart use of your abilities isnt needed at the moment.

While this is true, you can math an avg. uptime intellect of the proc and so the mp5 of your manapool.
You cant say the replenishment doesnt happen. It happens about 45/15 of the time.
Of course it variies in reference of the uptime.

I can only tell you from my experiences, The Darkmoon Card proc is up as soon as its possible.

Ive made a math of the proc and the uptime. The range is 45 seconds.

ideal proc = 45 sec
worst case = 89 sec

90 sec would be the time a second proc could happen. With my numbers i didnt took into account the perfect usage of mana tide with a Darkmoon proc. So obviously the mp5 will be alot higher.

Credit to pitbuller.
My math is based on those numbers:

One intellect give:
1. Initial mana pool. +18mana.
2. Replenish. 0.225mp5
3. Mana tide. 4.32mana per use.

In five minute fight those number are:
1. 0.3mp5
2. 0.225mp5
3. 0.072mp5



Darkmoon Card
52,75 critrating
28,75 spellpower
83,93 mp5

If i made a mistake, please correct me.
regards
gun

Sorry for bringing this topic back up, but wanted to discuss it. First off, the spreadsheet is fantastic. I wanted to thank you for taking the time to create it.

Adding 190 spell power certainly does generate more HPS than 160 haste, but it is important to take overhealing into account when you make this comparison. Using your spreadsheet and the following assumptions, haste is actually a better stat than spell power.

Spell power: 2500
Haste: 500

I am going to use CH plus 3 targets as my example. Using the above stats, CH+3 heals for 4,778 HPS. If you add 190 spell power to this setup, CH+3 has 5,050 HPS. If you add 160 haste, CH+3 has only 4,981 HPS. But, you need to factor in overheal when gemming spell power. Taking a fairly conservative number and assuming you only overheal 30% on your CH (it's probably closer to 40% on average), you lose 0.3*(5,050-4,778) = 81.6 HPS from the spell power approach. This yields a HPS of 4,968.4 HPS for the spell power route versus 4,981 HPS for the haste route.

Clearly this is extremely gear and encounter dependent, but I personally try to gem for both SP and haste. There is obviously a downside of haste. While it doesn't result in overhealing, it does put a larger strain on your mana pool. As has been discussed many times though, mana is not an issue right now.

Since there are several variables here, a simple plot may be difficult to generate, but I wonder if we can make a 3-D plot of this. X-axis would be spell power, Y-axis would be haste, and Z-axis would be HPS. This might make it visually obvious if haste or spell power is your better stat given your current gear.

So you are assuming that if you add spellpower you get 30% overheal but if you add haste you have 0 overheal? I'm not disagreeing that haste is a good stat but I really don't think you have an apples to apples comparison in your statement.

Also I would argue that spellpower helps riptide and earth shield more than haste does, but you can make the argument that a lower gcd allows you cast the next spell slightly faster. The haste vs spellpower debate has been going on a long time I there are advantages to both you should itemize for your playstyle, raid make up, and encounters.

I would argue that adding haste does not increase your overhealing. The amount healed doesn't change, only the time to heal. On the contrary, you could make an argument haste will decrease your average overheal as you can beat other healers to the punch.

But, you make a really valid point about riptide and earth shield. I should have accounted for those.

As you said, it all depends heavily on your play style and the content.

That wasn't what I was saying. I was saying that while haste's reduction of cast time does lower overhealing (assuming there is more than enough to go around) Comparing a 30% overhealing to 0 overhealing hardly seems like a fair comparison. How much haste lowers overhealing is going to vary alot. Personally I feel the "Reduces overhealing" only matters if meters are your primary concern. I think the primary benefit is just getting that cast to land before someone dies. This is obviously impossible to put a numerical value on.

Any spellpower you add to your existing gear should have a higher overhealing percentage than your current average since any heal target you currently overheal will be 100% overheal from added spellpower. To account for spellpower's overhealing without modifying haste's value, you'd need to divide by haste's effect. If you had 60% of added spellpower overhealing*, 35% existing (assumed value for haste), you'd have (100-60%) / (100-35%) ~ 61.5% effective healing relative to haste per percentage gain on raw healing for both.

* - Note I am not talking about your new total overhealing, but only the overhealing of the added spellpower. That information is available in logs, although would require quite a bit of work to obtain. I have no idea if 60% is realistic or not, and spell selection would effect this greatly.

I think its difficult to calulate the amount of overhealing incrementally added by sp power vs haste because of the volatile nature of healing needs. Sometimes, im gonna have 95% overheal on a chain heal cast, sometimes ill have 100% on a riptide or earth shield. but sometimes, ill have 0% overheals on all my heals.

taking your average overall overheals throughout a fight, be it 40% or 60% or whatever it is not a good depiction of what your overheals for additional spellpower or haste will give you in a certain situation.

IMHO we should just look at raw throughput. What will put out more HPS at 0% overheals?
Reason being is in that situation - the 0% overheal situation is when you need it. if your doing 80% overheals because everyone is topped off already who cares? it doesnt matter at all does it.

But when heavy damage is going down, and your frantically pumping out heals to keep people up , THATS when it counts. (like when shadron and vesperon are up in sarth3d) That is when it matters how much throughput your pumping out. In those situations, overheals will be very low.

So in conclusion, taking overheal % is irrelevant because it doesnt accurately model the volatile nature of healing needs. We should take into consideration a worst case scenario, when your throughput really matters, and in those scenarios overhealing is low, if not 0%.